IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT3) 


5^ 


^O 

^  i^ 


M/    />,V4. 


^ 


^ 


M/ 


IL 


e 


1.0 


I.I 


■5,0      -"^^        MVl^ 

Ki  I^B    IW22 


wm 


!il.25  i  1.4 


1.6 


V] 


/) 


^r.% 


1' 


"^j 


7 


Photogcaphic 

Sdences 

Corporation 


23  Wi$T  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  14580 

(716)  S72-4503 


CiHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHIVI/iCMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


O^ 


^ 


1981 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibiiographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Teatures  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  dny  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exempleire 
qu'il  lui  a  6t6  posslllilG  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  biblionraphique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
una  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  m^thode  normala  de  filmage 
sont  indiquis  ci-deiisous. 


□    Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 


□    Coloured  pageit/ 
Pages  de  couleur 


V/ 


Covers  damaged/ 
Couverture  endommag^e 


□    Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagtNes 


D 


Coveis  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaurde  et/ou  pellicul6e 


□    Cover  title  missing/ 
Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 


□    Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaur^es  et/ou  pellicuides 

r~7f  Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
UlJ    Pages  d6color6es,  tachetdes  ou  piqudes 


I      I    Coloured  maps/ 


Cartes  g^ographiques  en  couleur 


□    Pages  detached/ 
Pages  d6tach6es 


D 
D 


Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire} 


Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 


r~y  Showthrough/ 

l±3    Tr 


I  ransparence 


□    Quality  of  print  varies/ 
Qualit^  in^gale  de  I'impression 


D 


Bound  wi  .h  other  material/ 
Reli4  eve.  d'autres  documents 


□    Includes  supplementacy  material/ 
Comprend  du  materiel  supplementaire 


n 


D 


Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  reliure  serr^e  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  intirieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajoutdes 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  6tait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6X6  filmdes. 


D 
D 


Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 

Pages  wholly  or  partinlly  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  peluro, 
etc  ,  ont  6t^  filmdes  d  nouveau  de  facon  d 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


a 


Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  !iuppl6mentaires: 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  film6  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqu£  ci-dessous. 


10X 

14X 

18X 

22X 

26X 

sax 

7 

12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


The  copy  filmed  hero  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

Library  of  the  Public 
Archives  of  Canada 


L'exemplaire  fllmA  fut  reproduit  grice  A  la 
gAnArositA  de: 

La  bibiiothdque  des  Archives 
pubiiques  du  Canada 


The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  arid  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  Iceeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Les  Images  suivantes  ont  4tA  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  ia  condition  at 
de  ia  netteti  de  l'exemplaire  fiimi.  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
flimage. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  Impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimte  sont  filmte  en  commenpant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
derniAre  page  qui  comporte  une  smpreinte 
d'imprecslon  ou  d'iliustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  salon  ie  cas.  Tous  los  autres  exemplaires 
origli^aux  sont  fllm#s  en  commenpant  par  la 
premiere  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'iliustration  «t  en  terminant  par 
la  dernldre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 


The  last  recorded  frame  en  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  —^  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaftra  sur  ia 
derniire  image  de  chaque  microfiche,  seion  ie 
cas:  la  symbols  — ►  signifie  "A  SUIVRE",  ie 
symbols  V  signifie  "FIN". 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  fiimad  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  laft  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  Atre 
fiim6s  A  des  taux  de  reduction  diff6rents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pcur  Atre 
reproduit  en  un  seui  clichA,  11  est  filmA  d  partir 
de  I'angie  sup6rieur  gaucha,  de  gauche  A  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  nAcessaira.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  ia  mAthode. 


1  2  3 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

mm 


m 


/i 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


IN    xHEIE  BEABING   ON 


CIVIL    ALLEGIANCE: 


A  POLITICAL  EXPOSTULATION. 


BY  THE 

RIGHT  HON.  W.  E.  GLADSTONE,  M.  P. 


WITH  THE 


REPLIES  OF  ARCHBISHOP  MANNING  AND  LORD  ACTON. 


NEW  YORK  : 
D.    APPLETON    AND    COMPANY, 

649  AND  B61  BROADWAY. 
1874. 


I 


C  O  I^  T  E  JN  T  S . 


I.  The  Occasion  and  Scope  of  this  Tract.     Four 
Propositions.     Are  tbey  True  ?  . 

II.  The  FmsT  and  Fouirni  PuoposmoNS.  (1)  "  That 
Home  iias  substituted  for  the  proud  boast  of 
semper  eadem  a  policy  of  violence  and  change  in 
faith."  (4)  "That  she  has  equally  repudiated 
modern  thought  and  ancient  history." 

III.  The   Second   Peoposition — "  That    she    has    re- 

furbished, and  paraded  anew,  every  rusty  tool 
she  was  thought  to  have  disused." 

IV.  The  TniKD  Pkoposition — "That  Rome  requires 

a  convert,  who  now  joins  her,  to  forfeit  his  moral 
and  mental  freedom,  and  to  place  his  loyalty  and 
civil  duty  at  the  mercy  of  another."   . 

Y.  Being  Tkue,  ake  the  Propositions  Material  ? 

VI.  pEiNG  True  and  Material,  were  the  Propo- 
sitions PEOPEK  to  be   bet  forth  BY  THE  PRESENT 

Writer  ? 

VII.  On  '!lW2  Home  Policy  of  the  Future. 

Appendices 


PAOR 


(> 


13 


16 


21 

47 


57 
62 
69 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


IN   THEIR   BEARING  OM 


CIVIL    ALLEGIANCE. 


I.  The  Occasion  and  Scope  of  this  Tract. 

In  the  prosecution  of  a  purpose  not  polemical 
but  pacific,  I  liave  been  led  to  employ  words  wliich 
beloncr,  more  or  less,  to  tbe  region  of  religious  con- 
trover°sy ;  and  wliicli,  tliougli  they  were  themselves 
few,  seem  to  require,  from  the  various  feelings  they 
have  aroused,  that  I  should  carefully  define,  elucidate, 
and  defend  them.  The  task  is  not  of  a  kind  agree- 
able to  me ;  but  I  proceed  to  perform  it. 

Among  the  causes,  which  have  tended  to  disturb 
and  perplex  the  public  mind  in  the  consideration  of 
our  own  religious  difficulties,  one  has  been  a  certain 
alarm  at  the  aggressive  activity  and  imagined  growth 
of  the  Eoman  Church  in  this  country.  All  are  aware 
of  our  susceptibility  on  this  side ;  and  it  was  not,  I 
think,  improper  for  one  who  desires  to  remove  every- 
thing that  can  interfere  with  a  calm  and  judicial 


6 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


H! 


!! 


temper,  and  who  believes  tlie  alarm  to  be  groiuid 
less,  to  state,  pointedly  tliougli  l)riefly,  some  reasons 
for  that  belief. 

Accordingly,  I  did  not  scruj^le  to  nse  the  follow- 
ing  language,  in  a  paper  inserted  in  the  number  of 
the  '  Contemporary  lieview '  for  the  month  of  Oc- 
tober. I  was  speaking  of  "  the  question  whether  a 
handful  of  the  clergy  are  or  are  not  engaged  in  an 
utterly  hopeless  and  visionary  effort  to  Romanise 
the  Church  and  people  of  England." 

"  At  no  time  since  the  bloody  reign  of  Mary  has 
such  a  scheme  been  possible.  But  if  it  had  been 
possible  in  the  seventeenth  or  eighteenth  centuries,  it 
would  still  have  become  impossible  in  the  nineteenth : 
when  Rome  has  substituted  for  the  proud  boast  of 
semper  eadem  a  policy  of  violence  and  change  in  faith ; 
when  she  has  refurbished,  and  paraded  anew,  every 
rusty  tool  she  was  fondly  thouglit  to  have  disused ; 
when  no  one  can  become  her  convert  without  re- 
nouncing his  moral  and  mental  freedom,  and  placing 
his  civil  loyalty  and  duty  at  the  mercy  of  another ; 
and  when  she  has  equally  repudiated  modern  thought 
and  ancient  history."  * 

Had  I  been,  when  I  wrote  this  passage,  as  I  now 
am,  addressing  myself  in  considerable  measure  to  my 
Roman  Catholic  fellow-countrymen,  I  should  have 
striven  to  avoid  the  seeming  roughness  of  some  of 


^:. 


■I 


4' 


*  * 


Contemporary  Review,'  Oct,,  1874,  p.  674. 


; 


IN  TIIEIU  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


nd 

Oils 

of 


•I 

4, 


these  expressious ;  but  a  ;  the  question  is  now  about 
their  substance,  from  which  I  am  not  in  any  particular 
disposed  to  recede,  any  attempt  to  recast  their  general 
form  would  probably  mislead.  I  proceed,  then,  to 
deal  with  them  on  their  merits. 

More  than  one  fi'iend  of  mine,  among  those  who 
have  been  led  to  join  the  Koman  Catholic  commun- 
ion, has  made  this  passage  the  subject,  more  or  less, 
of  expostulation.  Now,  in  my  o])inion,  the  asser- 
tions which  it  makes  are,  as  coming  from  a  layman 
who  has  spent  most  and  the  best  years  of  his  life  in 
the  observation  and  practice  of  politics,  not  aggres- 
sive but  defensive. 

It  is  neither  the  abettors  of  the  Papal  Chair,  nor 
any  one  who,  however  far  from  being  an  abettor  of 
the  Papal  Chair,  actually  writes  from  a  Papal  point 
of  view,  that  has  a  right  to  remonstrate  with  the 
world  at  large ;  but  it  is  the  world  at  large,  on  the 
contrary,  that  has  the  fullest  right  to  remonstrate, 
first  with  His  Holiness,  secondly  with  those  who 
share  his  proceedings,  thirdly  even  with  such  as 
passively  allow  and  accept  them. 

I  therefore,  as  one  of  the  world  at  large,  propose 
to  exj)ostulate  in  my  turn.  I  shall  strive  to  show  to 
such  of  my  Koman  Catholic  fellow-subjects  as  may 
kindly  give  me  a  hearing  that,  after  the  singular 
steps  which  the  authorities  of  their  Church  have 
in  these  last  years  thought  fit  to  take,  the  people 


u 


8 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


,  : 


fl 


of  tliis  country,  wlio  fully  believe  iu  their  loyalty, 
are  entitled,  on  purely  civil  grounds,  to  expect  from 
them  some  declaration  or  manifestation  of  opinion, 
in  reply  to  that  ecclesiastical  party  in  their  Church 
who  have  laid  down,  in  their  name,  principles  adverse 
to  the  purity  and  integrity  of  civil  allegiance. 

Undoubtedly  my  allegations  are  of  great  breadth. 
Such  broad  allegations  require  a  broad  and  a  deep 
foundation.  The  first  question  which  they  raise  is, 
Are  they,  as  tj  the  material  part  of  them,  true  ? 
But  even  their  truth  might  not  suffice  to  show  that 
their  publication  was  opportune.  The  second  ques- 
tion, then,  which  they  raise  is,  Are  they,  for  any 
practical  purpose,  material  ?  And  there  is  yet  a 
third,  though  a  minor,  question,  which  arises  out 
of  the  propositions  in  connection  with  their  author- 
ship, Were  they  suitable  to  be  set  forth  by  the  pres- 
ent writer? 

To  these  three  questions  I  will  now  set  myself  to 
reply.  And  the  matter  of  my  reply  will,  as  I  con- 
ceive, constitute  and  convey  an  appeal  to  the  under- 
standings  of  my  Roman  Catholic  fellow-countrymen, 
which  I  trust  that,  at  the  least,  some  among  them 
may  deem  not  altogether  unworthy  of  their  con- 
sideration. 

From  the  language  used  by  some  of  the  organs 
of  Roman  Catholic  opinion,  it  is,  I  am  afraid,  plain 
that  in  some  quarters  they  have  given  deep  offence. 


f 


1 


I 


IN  TriEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


9 


Displeasure,  iiidignation,  even  fury,  might  be  said  to 
mark  tlio  laii*xua£ce  wliicli  in  the  heat  of  the  moment 
has  been  expressed  here  and  there.  They  have  been 
hastily  treated  as  an  attack  made  uj)on  Koman  Catlio- 
iics  generally,  nay,  as  an  insult  offered  them.  It  is 
obvious  to  reply,  that  of  Roman  Catholics  generally 
they  state  nothing.  Together  with  a  reference  to 
"  converts,"  of  which  I  shall  say  more,  they  consti- 
tute generally  a  free  and  strong  animadversion  on 
the  conduct  of  the  Papal  Chair,  and  of  its  advisers 
and  abe+tors.  If  I  am  told  that  he  who  animadverts 
upon  these  assails  thereby,  or  insults,  Roman  Catho- 
lics at  large,  who  do  not  choose  their  ecclesiastical 
rulers,  and  are  not  recognised  as  having  any  voice  in 
the  government  of  their  Church,  I  cannot  be  bound 
by  or  accept  a  proposition  which  seems  to  me  to  be 
so  little  in  accordance  with  reason. 

Before  all  things,  however,  I  should  desire  it  to 
be  understood  that,  in  the  remarks  now  offered,  I 
desire  to  eschew  not  only  religious  bigotry,  but  like- 
wise theological  controversy.  Indeed,  with  theol- 
ogy,  except  in  its  civil  bearing,  with  theology  as 
such,  I  have  here  nothing  Avhatever  to  d  ,  But  it  is 
the  peculiarity  of  Roman  theology  that,  by  thrusting 
itself  into  the  temporal  domain,  it  naturally,  and 
even  necessarily,  comes  to  be  a  frequent  theme  of 
political  discussion.  To  quiet-minded  Roman  Cath- 
olics, it  must  be  a  subject  of  infinite  annoyance,  that 


iO 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


i 


ij 


fi( 


t? 


tlieir  religion  is,  on  this  ground  more  tlian  any  otLei', 
tbe  subject  of  criticism ;  more  than  any  otLer,  tlic 
occasion  of  conflicts  witli  the  State  and  of  civil  dis- 
quietude. 1  feel  sincerely  how  much  hardship  +heir 
case  entails.  But  this  hardship  is  brought  upon 
them  altogether  by  the  conduct  of  the  authorities  of 
their  own  Church.  Why  did  theology  enter  so 
largely  into  the  debates  cf  Parliament  on  Roman 
Catholic  Emancipation  ?  Certainly  not  because  our 
statesmen  and  debaters  of  fifty  years  ago  had  an 
abstract  love  of  such  controversies,  l)ut  because  it 
was  extensively  believed  that  the  Pope  of  Pome  had 
been  and  was  a  trespasser  upon  ground  which  be- 
longed to  the  civil  authority,  and  that  he  affected  to 
determine  by  spiritual  prerogative  o^uestions  of  the 
civil  sphere.  This  fact,  if  fact  it  be,  and  not  the 
truth  or  falsehood,  the  reasonableness  or  unreason- 
ableness, of  any  article  of  purely  religious  belief,  is 
the  whole  and  sole  cause  of  tlie  mischief.  To  this 
fact,  and  to  this  fact  alone,  my  language  is  referable : 
but  for  this  fact^  it  would  have  been  neither  my 
duty  nor  my  desire  to  use  it.  All  other  Christian 
bodies  are  content  with  freedom  in  their  own  re- 
ligious domain.  Orientals,  Luthe.ans,  Calvinists, 
Presbyterians,  Episcopalians,  Nonconformists,  one 
and  all,  in  the  present  day,  contentedly  and  thank- 
fully accept  the  benefits  of  civil  order;  never  pre- 
tend that  the  State  is  not  its  own  master;  make  no 


IN"  TKEIR  BEARING  OX  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


11 


religious  claims  to  temporal  possessions  or  advan- 
tages; and,  consequently,  never  are  in  perilous  col- 
lision witL  the  State.  Nay,  more,  even  so  I  believe 
it  is  witli  tlie  mass  of  Roman  Catliolics  individually. 
But  rot  so  with  the  leaders  of  their  Church,  or  with 
those  who  take  piide  in  following  the  leaders.  In- 
deed, this  has  heen  made  matter  of  boasi : — 

"There  is  not  another  Church  so  called  "  (than  the  Roman), 
''  nor  any  commvmity  professing  to  be  a  Church,  which  does  not 
srbmit,  or  obey,  or  hold  its  peace,  when  the  civil  governors  of 
the  world  command." — "  The  Present  Crisis  of  the  Holy  See," 
by  H.  E.  Manning,  D.  D.     London,  18G1,  p.  75. 

The  Rome  of  the  Middle  Ages  claimed  universal 
monarchy.  The  modern  Church  of  Rome  has 
abandoned  nothing,  retracted  nothing.  Is  that  all  ? 
Far  from  it.  By  condemning  (as  will  be  seen)  those 
who,  like  Bishop  Doyle  in  1826,*  charge  the  medi- 
eval Popes  with  aggression,  she  unconditionally, 
even  if  covertly,  maintains  what  the  mediaeval 
Popes  maintained.  But  even  this  is  not  the  worst. 
The  worst  by  far  is  that  wherea.  in  the  national 
Churches  and  communities  of  the  Middle  Acres, 
there  was  a  brisk,  vigorous,  and  constant  opposition 
to  these  outrageous  claims,  an  opposition  which 
stoutly  asserted  its  own  orthodoxy,  which  always 
caused  itself  to  be  respected,  and  which  even  some- 
times gained   the  upper  hand ;    now,  in    this  nine- 


*  Lords'  Committee,  March  18,  182G.     Report,  p.  190. 


12 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


I 

I  pi 


I 


i 


'II 


teenth  century  of  ours,  and  wliile  it  is  growing  oM, 
this  same  opposition  has  been  put  out  of  court,  and 
judicially  extinguished  Avithin  the  Papal  ChurcL, 
by  the  recent  decrees  of  the  Vatican.  And  it  is 
impossible  for  persons  accepting  those  decrees  justly 
to  complain,  when  sucb  documents  are  subjected  in 
good  faitb  to  a  strict  examination  as  respects  tbeir 
compatibility  with  civil  right  and  the  obedience  of 
subjects. 

In  defending  my  language,  I  sliall  carefully  mark 
its  limits.  But  all  defence  is  reassertion,  which  prop- 
erly requires  a  deliberate  recousideration ;  and  no 
man  who  thus  reconsiders  should  scruple,  if  he  find 
so  much  as  a  word  that  may  convey  a  false  impression, 
to  amend  it.  Exactness  in  stating  truth  according 
to  the  measure  of  our  intelligence,  is  an  indispensable 
condition  of  justice,  and  of  a  title  to  be  heard. 

My  propositions,  then,  as  they  stood,  are  these : — 

1.  That  "  RoQie  has  substituted  for  the  proud 
boast  of  semper  eadem^  a  policy  of  violence  and  change 
in  faith." 

2.  That  she  has  refurbished  and  paraded  anew 
every  rusty  tool  she  was  fondly  thought  to  have 
disused 

3.  That  no  ore  can  now  become  her  convert  with- 
out renouncing  his  moral  and  mental  freedom,  and 
placing  his  civil  loyalty  and  duty  at  tlie  mercy  of 
another. 


'■fj- 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


13 


4.  That  she  ("  Rome  ")  Las  equally  repudiated 
modern  thought  and  ancient  history. 


II.  The  Fikst  aj^d  the  Fourth  Propositions. 

Of  the  first  and  fourth  of  these  propositions  I  shall 
dispose  rather  summarily,  as  they  appear  to  belong 
to  the  theological  domain.  They  refer  to  a  fact,  and 
they  record  an  opinion.  One  fact  to  which  they 
refer  is  this :  that,  in  days  within  my  memory,  the 
constant,  favoiite,  and  imposing  argument  of  Roman 
controversialists  was  the  unbroken  and  absolute 
identity  in  belief  of  the  Roman  Church  from  the 
days  of  our  Saviour  until  now.  •  No  one,  who  has  at 
all  followed  the  course  of  this  literature  during  the 
last  forty  years,  can  fail  i,o  be  sensible  of  the  change 
in  its  present  tenor.  More  and  more  have  the 
assertiouG  of  continuous  uniformity  of  doctrine  re- 
ceded into  scarcely  penetrable  shadow.  More  and 
more  have  another  series  of  assertions,  of  a  living 
authority,  ever  roady  to  open,  adopt,  and  shape 
Christian  doctrine  according  to  the  times,  taken  their 
place.  Without  discussing  the  abstract  compatibility 
of  these  lines  of  argument,  I  note  two  of  the  immense 
practical  differences  between  them.  In  the  first,  the 
office  claimed  by  the  Church  is  principally  that  of  a 
witness  to  facts ;  in  the  second,  principally  that  of  a 
judge,  if  not  a  revealer,  of  doctrine.    In  the  first,  the 


14 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


fill 


processes  wliicli  the  Clmrcli  undertakes  are  subject  to 
a  constant  challenge  and  appeal  to  history ;  in  the 
second,  no  amount  of  historical  testimony  can  avail 
against  the  unmeasured  power  of  the  theory  of  de- 
velopment. Most  important,  most  pregnant  consid- 
erations, these,  at  least  for  two  classes  of  persons :  for 
those  who  think  that  exaggerated  doctrines  of  Church 
power  are  among  the  real  and  serious  dangers  of  the 
age  ;  and  for  those  who  think  that  against  all  forms, 
both  of  superstition  and  of  unbelief,  one  main  pre- 
servative is  to  be  found  in  maintaining  the  truth  and 
authority  of  history,  and  the  inestimable  value  of  the 
historic  spirit.  ' 

So  much  for  the  fact ;  as  for  the  opinion  that 
the  recent  Papal  decrees  are  at  war  with  modern 
thought,  and  that,  purporting  to  enlarge  the  neces- 
sary creed  of  Christendom,  they  involve  a  violent 
breach  with  history,  this  is  a  matter  unfit  for  mo  to 
discuss,  as  it  is  a  question  of  Divinity ;  but  not  unfit 
for  me  to  have  mentioned  in  my  article,  since  the 
opinion  given  there  is  the  opinion  of  those  with 
whom  I  was  endeavoring  to  reason,  namely,  the 
great  majority  of  the  British  public. 

If  it  is  thought  that  the  word  violence  is  open  to 
exception,  I  regret  I  cannot  give  it  up.  The  justifi- 
cation of  the  ancient  definitions  of  the  Church,  which 
have  endured  the  storms  of  1,500  years,  was  to  be 
found  in  this,  that  they  were  not  arbitrary  or  wilful, 


IN  TIIEIU  BEAPwING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


15 


but  tliat  they  wholly  sprang  from,  and  related  to, 
theories  rampant  at  the  time,  and  regarded  as  men 
aeing  to  Christian  belief.  Even  the  canons  of  the 
Council  of  Trent  have,  in  the  main,  this  amount, 
apart  from  their  matter,  of  presumptive  warrant. 
Bui;  the  decrees  of  the  present  perilous  Pontificate 
have  been  passed  to  favor  and  precipitate  prevailing 
currents  of  opinion  in  the  ecclesiastical  world  of 
Rome.  The  growth  of  what  is  often  termed  among 
Protestants  Mariolatry,  and  of  belief  in  Papal  Infalli- 
bility, was  notoriously  advancing,  but  it  seems  not 
fast  enough  to  satisfy  the  dominant  party.  To  aim 
the  deadly  blows  of  1854*  and  1870  at  the  old  his- 
toric, scientific,  and  moderate  school,  was  surely  an 
act  of  violence ;  and  with  this  censure  the  proceed- 
ing of  1870  has  actually  been  visited  by  the  first 
living  theologian  now  within  the  Roman  commun- 
ion ;  I  mean  Dr.  John  Henry  Newman,  who  has  used 
these  significant  wovds,  among  others :  "  Why  should 
an  aggressive  and  insolent  faction  be  allowed  to 
make  the  heart  of  the  just  sad,  whom  the  Lord  hath 
not  made  sorrowful  ? "  f 


*  Decree  of  the  Immaculate  Conception, 
f  iSee  the  remarkable  letter  of  Dr.  Newman  to  Bishop  Ulla« 
thorne,  in  the  '  Guardian '  of  April  6,  1870. 


Ifi 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


III.  The  Second  Proposition. 

I  take  next  my  second  proposition:  that  Rome 
has  refurbished,  and  paraded  anew,  every  rusty  tool 
she  was  fondly  thought  to  have  disused. 

Is  this,  then,  a  fact,  or  is  it  not  ? 

I  must  assume  that  it  is  denied ;  and  therefore  I 
cannot  wholly  pass  by  the  work  of  proof.  But  I 
will  state  in  the  fewest  possible  words,  and  with  ref- 
erences, a  fev/  propositions,  all  the  holders  of  which 
have  been  condemned  by  the  See  of  Rome  during  my 
own  generation,  and  especially  within  the  last  twelve 
or  fifteen  years.  And,  in  order  that  I  may  do  noth- 
ing toward  importing  passion  into  what  is  matter  of 
pure  argument,  I  will  avoid  citing  any  of  the  fear- 
fully energetic  epithets  in  which  the  condemnations 
are  sometimes  clothed : 

1.  Those  who  maintain  the  liberty  of  the  press. 
Encyclical  Letter  of  Pope  Gregory  XVI.,  in  1831, 
and  of  Pope  Pius  IX.,  in  1864. 

2.  Or  the  liberty  of  conscience  and  of  worship 
Encyclical  of  Pius  IX.,  December  8,  1864. 

8.  Or  the  liberty  of  speech.  'Syllabus'  of 
March  18,  1861.  Prop.  Ixxix.  Encyclical  of  Pope 
Pi^iS  IX.,  December  8, 1864. 

4.  Or  who  contend  that  Papal  judgments  and 
decrees  may,  without  sin,  be  disobeyed,  or  differed 


!•; 


tt!l 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.         17 


fvome 
tool 


from,  unless  they  treat  of  the  rules  (dogmata)  of 
faith  or  morals.     Ibid. 

5.  Or  who  assign  to  the  State  the  power  of  de- 
fining the  civil  rights  (jura)  and  province  of  the 
Ciiurch.  '  Syllabus '  of  Pope  Pius  IX.,  March  8, 
1861.     Ibid.  Prop.  xix. 

G.  Or  who  hold  that  Eoman  Pontiffs  and  Ecu- 
menical Councils  have  transsjressed  the  limits  of 
their  power,  and  usurped  the  rights  of  princes. 
Ibid.  Prop,  xxiii. 

(^It  must  he  home  in  mind^  that  ^^  Ecumenical 
Councils  "  here  mean  Roman  Councils  not  recognised 
hy  the  rest  of  the  Church.  The  Councils  of  the  early 
Church  did  not  interfere  with  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
civil  ^ower.) 

7.  Or  that  the  Church  may  not  employ  force. 
(Ecclesia  vis  inferendce potestatem  non  hahet.)  'Syl- 
labus,' Prop.  xxiv. 

8.  Or  that  power,  not  inherent  in  the  office  of 
the  Episcopate,  but  granted  to  it  by  the  civil  au- 
thority, may  be  withdrawn  from  it  at  tlie  discretion 
of  that  authority.     Ibid.  Prop.  xxv. 

9.  Or  that  the  (immunitas)  civil  immunity  of 
the  Church  and  its  ministers  depends  upon  civil 
right.     Ibid.  Prop.  xxx. 

10.  Or  that  in  the  conflict  of  laws,  civil  and 

ecclesiastical,  the  civil  law  should  prevail.     Ibid. 

Pivp.  xlii. 

3 


■'.s.',v7,jiifn 


18 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


11.  Or  that  any  metliod  of  instruction  of  youtL, 
solely  secular,  may  be  approved.     Ibid.  Prop,  xlviii. 

12.  Or  that  knowledge  of  things,  philosophical 
and  civil,  may  and  should  decline  to  be  guided  by 
Divine  and  -EI  clesiastlcal  authority.     Ibid.  Prop.  Ivii. 

13.  Or  that  murriaore  is  not  in  its  essence  a  Sac- 
rament.     Ibid.  Prop.  Ixvi. 

14.  Or  that  marriage,  not  sacramentally  con- 
tracted (si  sacrament um  excludatui')^  has  a  binding 
force.     Ibid.  Prop.  Ixxiii. 

15.  Or  that  the  abolition  of  the  Temporal  Power 
of  the  Popedom  w^ould  be  highly  advantageous  to 
the  Church.    Ibid.  Prop.  Ixxvi.     Also  Ixx. 

16.  Or  that  any  other  religion  than  the  Roman 
reliijion  may  be  established  by  a  State.  Ibid.  Prop. 
Ixx  VI  i. 

17.  Or  that  in  "  Countries  called  Catholic,"  the 
free  exercise  of  other  religions  may  laudably  be 
allowed.     '  Syllabus,'  Prop.  Ixxviii. 

18.  Or  that  the  Roman  Pontiff  ought  to  come 
to  terms  w^ith.  progress,  liberalism,  and  modern  civ- 
ilization.    Ibid.  Prop.  Ixxx.* 

This  list  is  now  perhaps  suflSiciently  extended, 
although  I  have  as  yet  not  touched  the  decrees  of 
1870.  But,  before  quitting  it,  I  must  offer  three 
observations  on  what  it  contains. 

*  For  the  original  passages  from  the  Encyclical  and  Syllabus 
of  Pius  IX.,  see  Appendix  A. 


ill 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


19 


tL, 

I  •  ■  • 

111. 

leal 

'^ii. 
lac- 


Firstly.  I  do  not  place  all  the  Propositions  in 
one  and  tlie  same  category ;  for  there  are  a  2)ortion 
of  them  which,  as  far  a^;  I  can  judge,  might,  by  the 
combined  aid  of  favorable  construction  and  vigorous 
explanation,  be  brought  within  bounds.  And  I  hold 
that  favorable  construction  of  the  terms  used  in  con- 
troversies is  the  right  general  rule.  But  this  can  , 
only  be  so  when  construction  is  an  ojien  question. 
When  the  author  of  certain  prop-sitions  claims,  as 
in  the  case  before  us,  a  sole  and  unlimited  power  to 
interpret  them  in  such  manner  and  by  such  rules  as 
he  may  from  time  to  time  think  fit,  the  only  defence 
for  all  others  concern '^d  is  at  once  to  judge  for  them- 
selves, how  much  of  unreason  or  of  mischief  the 
words,  naturally  understood,  may  contain.  • 

Secondly.  It  may  appear,  upon  a  hasty  perusal, 
that  neither  the  infliction  of  penalty  in  life,  limb, 
libert}",  or  goods,  on  disobedient  members  of  the 
Christian  Church,  nor  the  title  to  depose  sovereigns, 
and  release  subjects  from  their  allegiance,  with  all 
its  revolting  consequences,  has  been  here  reaffirmed. 
In  terms,  there  is  no  mention  of  them  ;  but  in  the 
substance  of  the  propositions,  I  grieve  to  say,  they 
are  beyond  doubt  included.  For  it  is  notorious  that 
they  have  been  declared  and  decreed  by  "Rome," 
that  is  to  say,  by  Popes  and  Papal  Councils ;  and 
the  stringent  condemnations  of  the  Syllabus  include 
all  those  who  hold  that  Popes  and  Papal  Councils 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


(iiii 


\ 


dh 


m 


(declared  ecumenical)  have  trfinsgreased  the  just  lim- 
its of  their  power,  or  usurped  the  rights  of  princes. 
What  have  been  their  opinions  and  decrees  about 
l)er8ecutioii  I  need  hardly  say ;  and  indeed  the  right 
to  employ  physical  force  is  even  here  undisguisedly 
claimed  (No.  7). 

Even  while  I  am  writing,  I  am  reminded,  from 
an  unquestionable  source,  of  the  words  of  Pope  Pius 
IX.  himself  on  the  deposing  power.  I  add  only  a 
few  italics;  the  words  appear  as  given  in  a  trans- 
lation, without  the  original : 

"The  present  Pontiff  used  these  words  in  replying-  to  the 
address  from  the  Academia  of  the  Catholic  Religion  (July  21, 
1873)  :— 

"  '  There  are  many  errors  regarding  the  Infallibility  :  but  the 
most  malicious  of  all  is  that  which  includes,  in  that  dogma,  the 
right  of  deposing  sovereigns,  and  declaring  the  people  no  longer 
bound  by  the  obligation  of  fidelity.  This  rlffht  has  now  and 
again,  in  critical  circumstances,' been  exercised  by  the  Pontiffs: 
but  it  has  nothing  to  do  with  Papal  Infallibility.  Its  origin  was. 
not  the  infallibility,  but  the  authority  of  the  Pope.  This  author- 
ity, in  accordance  with  the  public  right,  which  was  then  vigor- 
ous, and  with  the  acquiescence  of  all  Christian  nations,  who 
reverenced  in  the  Pope  the  supreme  Judge  of  the  Christian 
Commonwealth,  extended  so  far  as  to  pass  judgmetit,  even  in 
civil  affairs,  on  the  acts  of  Princes  and  of  Nations.'' "  * 

Lastly,  I  must  observe  that  these  are  not  mere 
opinions  of  the  Pope  himself,  nor  even  are  they 

♦"Civilization  and  the  See  of  Rome."  By  Lord  Robert 
Montagu.  Dublin,  1874.  A  Lecture  delivered  under  the  auspices 
of  the  Catholic  Union  of  Ireland.  I  have  a  little  misgiving 
about  the  version :  but  not  of  a  nature  to  affect  the  substance. 


IN  TllEIIl  IJEAIIING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


21 


opiiiious  wliicli  he  iiiiglit  paternally  recommend  to 
the  pious  consideration  of  the  faithful.  With  the 
promulgation  of  lils  opinions  is  unhappily  com- 
bined, in  the  Encyclical  Letter,  which  virtually, 
though  not  expressly,  includes  tlie  whole,  a  conmiand 
to  all  his  spiritual  children  (from  which  command 
we  the  disobedient  children  are  in  no  way  excluded) 
to  hold  them : 

"Itaque  omnes  et  singulas  pravas  opiniones  et 
doctrlnas  singillatim  hisce  Uteris  commemoratas  auc- 
toritate  nostrd  Apostolic^  reprobamus,  proscribimus, 
atque  damnamus  ;  easque  ab  omnibus  Catholicie 
Ecclesite  filiis,  veluti  reprobatas,  proscrij^tas,  atque 
damnatas  omnino  haberi  volumus  et  mandamus." 
Encycl.  Dec.  8,  1864. 

x\nd  the  decrees  of  1870  will  presently  show  us, 
what  they  establish  as  the  binding  force  of  the  mart' 
date  thus  conveyed  to  the  Christian  world. 

IV.  The  Third  Proposition. 


I  now  pass  to  the  operation  of  these  extraor- 
dinary declarations  on  personal  and  private  duty. 

When  the  cup  of  endurance,  which  had  so  long 
been  filling,  began,  with  the  council  of  the  Vatican 
in  1870,  to  overflow,  the  most  famous  and  learned 
living  theologian  of  the  Roman  Communion,  Dr.  von 
Dollinger,  long  the  foremost  champion  of  his  Church. 


m 


■1: 


22  THE  VATICAN  DECREES 

refused  compliance,  jmd  submitted,  Avitli  liis  ti'm])er 
undisturbed  and  his  freedom  unimpaired,  to  the  ex- 
treme and  most  painful  penalty  of  excommunication. 
With  him,  many  of  the  most  learned  and  I'espected 
theologians  of  the  Roman  Communion  in  Germany 
underwent  the  same  sentence.  Tlie  very  few,  who 
elsewhere  (I  do  not  speak  of  Switzerland)  suffered  iu 
like  manner,  deserve  an  admiration  rising  in  propor- 
tion to  their  fewness.  It  seems  as  though  Germany, 
from  -which  Luther  blew  the  mighty  trumpet  that 
even  now  echoes  through  the  land,  still  retained  her 
primacy  in  the  domain  of  conscience,  still  supplied 
the  ceniuria  prwror/ativa  of  the  great  comitla  of  the 
world. 

But  let  no  man  wonder  or  complain.  Without 
imputing  to  any  one  the  moral  murder,  for  such  it  is, 
of  stifling  conscience  and  conviction,  I  for  one  cannot 
be  surprised  that  the  fermentation,  which  is  working 
through  the  mind  of  the  Latin  Church,  lias  as  yet 
(elsewhere  than  iu  Germany)  but  in  few  instances 
come  to  the  surface.  By  the  mass  of  mankind,  it  is 
morally  impossible  that  questions  such  as  these  can 
be  adequately  examined ;  so  it  ever  has  been,  and  so 
in  the  main  it  will  continue,  until  the  principles  of 
manufacturing  machinery  shall  have  been  applied, 
and  with  analogous  results,  to  intellectual  and  moral 
processes.  Followers  they  are  and  must  l)e,  and  in  a 
certain  sense  ousjht  to  be.    But  what  as  to  the  leaders 


ill' 


II. 


'M 


m 


IN  THEIR  UEAUINC}   ON   CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


23 


of  Hoelety,  the  men  of  ecluention  and  of  leisnre  ?  I  will 
try  to  suggest  some  answer  in  few  words.  A  change 
of  religious  profession  is  under  all  circumstances  a 
great  and  awful  thing.  Much  more  is  the  qn  stion, 
however,  between  conflicting,  or  apparently  conflict- 
ing, duties  arduous,  when  the  religion  of  a  man  iuip 
l)een  changed  for  him,  over  his  head,  and  without  the 
very  least  of  his  participation.  Far  be  it  then  from 
me  to  make  any  Roman  Catholic,  except  the  great 
hierarchic  Power,  and  those  who  have  egged  it  on, 
responsible  for  the  portentous  proceedings  which  we 
have  witnessed.  My  conviction  is  that,  even  of  those 
who  may  not  shake  off  the  yoke,  multitudes  will 
vindicate  at  any  rate  their  loyalty  at  the  expense  of 
the  consistency,  which  perhaps  in  difficult  matters  of 
religion  few  among  us  perfectly  maintain.  But  this 
belongs  to  the  future ;  for  the  present,  nothing  could 
in  my  opinion  be  more  unjust  than  to  hold  the  mem- 
])ers  of  the  Roman  Church  in  general  already  respon- 
sible for  the  recent  innovations.  The  duty  of  obt^ervers, 
who  think  the  claims  involved  in  these  decrees  ar- 
rogant and  false,  and  such  as  not  even  impotence  real 
or  supposed  ought  to  shield  from  criticism,  is  franklj' 
to  state  the  case,  and,  by  way  of  friendly  challenge, 
to  entreat  their  Roman  Catholic  fellow-countrymen 
to  replace  themselves  in  the  position  which  five-and 
foity  years  ago  this  nation,  by  the  voice  and  action 
of  its  Parliament,  declared  its  belief  that  they  held. 


I 


II:- 

m 


H. 


24 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


Upon  a  strict  reexamination  of  the  language,  as 
apart  from  the  substance  of  my  fourth  Proposition, 
I  find  it  faulty,  inasmuch  as  it  seems  to  imply  that  a 
"  convert "  now  joining  tho  Papal  Church,  not  only 
gives  up  certain  rights  and  duties  of  freedom,  but 
surrenders  them  by  a  conscious  and  deliberate  act. 
What  I  have  less  accur-itel/  said  that  he  renounced, 
I  might  have  more  accurately  said  that  he  forfeited. 
To  speak  strictly,  the  claim  now  made  upon  Lim  by 
the  authority,  which  he  solemnly  and  with  the  high- 
est responsibility  acknowledges,  requires  him  to  sur- 
render his  mental  and  moral  freedom,  and  to  place 
his  loyalty  and  civil  duty  at  the  mercy  of  another. 
There  may  have  been,  and  may  be,  persons  who  in 
their  sanguine  trust  will  not  shrink  from  this  result, 
and  will  console  themselves  with  tho  notion  that 
their  loyalty  and  civil  duty  are  to  be  committed  to 
the  custody  o^  one  much  wiser  than  themselves.  But 
I  am  sure  that  thercare  also  "  converts  "  who,  when 
they  perceive,  will  by  word  and  act  reject  the  con- 
sequence which  relentless  logic  draws  for  them.  If, 
however,  my  proposition  be  true,  there  is  no  escape 
from  the  dilemma.  Is  it  then  true,  or  is  it  not  true, 
that  Rome  requires  a  convert,  who  now  joins  her, 
to  forfeit  his  moral  and  mental  freedom,  and  to 
place  his  loyalty  and  civil  duty  at  the  mercy  of  an- 
other ? 

In  order  to  place  this  matter  in  as  clear  a  light 


\- 


f; 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


25 


as  I  can,  it  will  be  necessary  to  go  back  a  little  upon 
our  recent  history. 

A  century  ngo  we  began  to  relax  that  system  of 
penal  laws  against  Roman  Catholics,  at  once  petti- 
fogging, base,  and  cruel,  which  Mr.  Burke  has  scathed 
and  blasted  with  his  immortal  eloquence. 

When  this  process  had  reached  the  point,  at  which 
the  question  was  whetlier  they  should  be  admitted 
into  Parliament,  there  arose  a  great  and  prolonged 
national  controversy ;  and  some  men,  who  at  no  time 
of  their  lives  were  narrow-minded,  such  as  Sh*  Rob- 
ert Peel,  the  Minister,  resisted  the  concession.  The 
arguments  in  its  favor  were  obvious  and  strong,  and 
they  ultimately  prevailed.  But  the  strength  of  the 
opposing  party  had  lain  in  the  allegation  that,  from 
the  nature  and  claims  of  the  Papal  power,  it  was 
not  possible  for  the  consistent  Ro.iian  Catholic  to 
pay  to  the  crown  of  this  country  an  entire  allegi- 
ance, and  that  the  admission  of  persons,  thus  self- 
disabled,  to  Parliament  was  inconsistent  with  the 
safety  of  the  State  and  nation ;  which  had  not  very 
long  before,  it  may  be  observed,  emerged  from  a 
struggle  for  existence. 

An  answer  to  this  argument  was  indispensable ; 
and  it  was  supplied  mainly  from  two  sources.  The 
Josephine  laws,'  then  still  subsisting  in  the  Austrian 


*  See  the  work  of  Count  dal  Pozzo  on  the  "  Austrian  Ecele 


26 


THE   VATICAN  DECREES 


m 


rn 


t> 


empire,  and  tlie  arrangements  wliieli  had  been  made 
after  the  peace  of  1815  by  Prussia  and  the  German 
States  with  Pius  VII.  and  Gonsalvi,  proved  that  the 
Papal  Court  could  submit  to  circumstances,  and 
could  allow  material  restraints  even  upon  the  exer- 
cise of  its  ecclesiastical  prerogatives.  Here,  then,  was 
a  reply  in  the  sense  of  the  phrase  soloitur  amhu- 
lando.  Much  information  of  this  class  was  collected 
for  the  information  of  Parliament  and  the  country.* 
But  there  were  also  measures  taken  to  learn,  from 
the  liio^hest  Ro-uan  Catholic  authorities  of  this  coun- 
try,  what  was  the  exact  situation  of  the  members  of 
that  communion  with  respect  to  some  of  the  better 
known  exorbitancies  of  Papal  assumption.  Did  the 
Pope  claim  any  temporal  jurisdiction  ?  Did  he  still 
pretend  to  the  exercise  of  a  power  to  depose  kings, 
release  subjects  from  their  allegiance,  and  incite 
them  to  revolt  i  "VVas  faith  to  be  kept  with  heretics  ? 
Did  the  Church  still  teach  the  doctrines  of  j^ersecu- 
tion  ?  Now,  to  no  one  of  these  questions  could  the 
answer  really  be  of  the  smallest  immediate  moment 

siastical  Lav."  London :  Murray,  1827.  The  Leopoldine  Laws 
in  Tuscan}'  may  also  be  mentioned. 

*  See  "Report from  the  Select  Committee  appointed  to  report 
the  rature  and  substance  of  the  Laws  and  Ordinances  existing 
in  Foreign  States,  respecting  the  regulation  of  their  Roman 
Catholic  subjects  in  Ecclesiastical  matters,  and  their  intercourse 
with  th'~  See  of  Rome,  or  any  other  Foreign  Ecclesiastical  Juris- 
diction. Printed  for  the  House  of  Commons  in  1816  and  1817 
Reprinted  1851. 


TX  THEIR  BEARING  OX  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


2T 


to  tliis  powerful  and  solidly  compacted  kingdom. 
They  were  topics  selected  by  way  of  sample;  and 
the  intention  was  to  elicit  declarations  showing  gen- 
erally that  the  fangs  of  mediaeval  Popedom  had  been 
drawn,  and  its  claws  torn  away;  that  the  Roman 
system,  however  strict  in  its  dogma,  was  perfectly 
compatible  with  civil  liberty,  and  with  the  institu- 
tions of  a  free  State  moulded  on  a  different  religious 
basis  from  its  own. 

Answers  in  abundance  were  obtained,  tonding  to 
show  that  the  doctrines  of  deposition  and  persecu- 
tion, of  keeping  no  faith  with  heretics,  and  of  uni- 
versal dominion,  were  obsolete  beyond  revival ;  that 
every  assurance  could  be  given  respecting  them, 
except  such  as  required  the  shame  of  a  formal  retrac- 
tation ;  that  they  were  in  offect  mere  bugbears,  un- 
worthy to  be  taken  into  account  by  a  nation  which 
prided  itself  on  being  made  up  of  practical  men. 

But  it  was  unquestionably  felt  that  something 
more  than  the  renunciation  of  these  particular  o2:)in- 
ions  was  necessary  in  order  to  secure  the  full  con- 
cession of  civil  rights  to  Roman  Catholics.  As  to 
their  individual  loyalty,  a  State  disposed  to  gener- 
ous or  candid  interpretation  had  no  reason  to  be 
uneasy.  It  was  only  with  regard  to  requisitions, 
which  might  be  made  on  them  from  another  quar- 
ter, that  apprehension  could  exist.  It  was  reason- 
able that  England  should  desire  to  know  not  only 


/  t 


28 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


I 


what  the  Pope  *  might  do  for  himself,  but  to  what 
demands,  by  the  constitution  of  their  Church,  they 
were  liable ;  and  how  far  it  was  possible  that  such 
demands  could  touch  their  civil  duty.  The  theory 
which  placed  every  human  being,  in  things  spiritual 
and  things  temporal,  at  the  feet  of  the  Roman  Pon- 
tiff, had  not  been  an  idolum  specus,  a  mere  theory  of 
the  chamber.  Brain-power  never  surpassed  in  the 
political  history  of  the  world  had  been  devoted  for 
centuries  to  the  sinsjle  purpose  of  working  it  into  the 
practice  of  Christendom ;  had  in  the  West  achieved 
for  an  impossible  problem  a  partial  success;  and  had 
in  the  East  punished  the  obstinate  independence  of 
the  Church  by  that  Latin  conquest  of  Constanti- 
nople which  effectually  prepared  the  way  for  the 
downfall  of  the  Eastern  Empire,  and  the  establish- 
ment of  the  Turks  in  Europe.  What  was  really 
material  therefor^  was,  not  whether  the  Papal  chair 
laid  claim  to  this  or  that  particular  power,  but 
whether  it  laid  claim  to  some  power  that  included 
them  all,  and  whether  that  claim  had  received  such 
sanction  from  the  authorities  of  the  Latin  Church, 
that  there  remained  within  her  borders  absolutely 


*  At  that  period  the  eminent  and  able  Bishop  Doyle  did  not 
scruple  to  write  as  follows :  "  "We  are  taunted  with  the  proceed- 
ings of  Popes.  What,  my  Lord,  have  we  Catholics  to  do  with 
the  proceedings  of  popes,  or  why  should  we  be  made  account- 
able for  them  ? " — '  Essay  on  the  Catholic  Claims.'  To  Lord 
Liverpool,  1836,  p.  111. 


IX  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


20 


no  tenable  standing-ground  from  whicli  war  against 
it  could  be  maintained.  Did  the  Pope  then  claim 
infallibility  ?  Or  did  he,  either  without  inMlibility 
or  with  it  (and  if  with  it,  so  much  the  worse),  claim 
an  universal  obedience  from  his  flock  ?  And  were 
these  claims,  either  or  both,  affirmed  in  his  Church 
by  authority  which  even  the  least  Papal  of  the  mem- 
bers  of  that  Church  must  admit  to  be  binding  upon 

conscience  ? 

The  two  first  of  these  questions  were  covered  by 
the  third.     And  well  it  was  that  they  were  so  cov- 
ered.     For  to  them  no  satisfactory  answer  could  even 
then  be  given.     The  Popes  had  kept  up,  with  com- 
paratively little  intermission,  for  well-nigh  a  thou- 
sand years  their  claim  to  dogmatic  infallibility  ;  and 
had,  at  periods  within  the  same  tract  of  time,  often 
enough  made,  and  never  retracted,  that  other  claim 
which  is  theoretically  less  but  practically  larger ; 
their  claim  to  an  obedience  virtually  universal  from 
the  baptised  members  of  the  Church.     To  the  third 
question  it  was  fortunately  more  practicable  to  pre 
scribe  a  satisfactory  reply.     It  was  w^ell  known  that, 
in  the  days  of  its  glory  and  intellectual  power,  the 
'    great  Galilean  Church  had  not  only  not  admitted 
but  had  denied  Papal  infallibility,  and  had  declarea^ 
that  the  local  laws  and  usages  of  the  Church  could 
net  be  set  aside  by  the  will  of  the  Pontiif.     Nay, 
further,  it  was  believed  that  in  the  main  these  had 


.   ■    .K 


I 


80 


THE  VATICAN   DECREES 


I 
J 


I 


been,  down  to  the  close  of  tlie  last  century,  tlie  pre- 
vailing opinions  of  tlie  Cisalpine  Clmrclies  in  com- 
munion witli  Kome.  The  Council  of  Constance  had  in 
act  as  well  as  word  shown  that  the  Pojro's  judgments, 
and  the  Pope  himself,  were  triable  by  the  assembled 
representatives  of  +he  Christian  world.  And  the 
Council  of  Trent,  notwithstanding  the  predominance 
in  it  of  Italian  and  Roman  influences,  if  it  had  not 
denied,  yet  had  not  affirmed  either  proposition. 

All  that  remained  was,  to  know  what  wf^ie  the 
sentiments  entertained  on  these  vital  points  by  the 
leaders  and  guides  of  Roman  Catholic  opinion  nearest 
to  our  own  doors.  And  here  testimony  was  offered, 
which  must  not,  and  cannot,  be  forgotten.  In  part, 
this  was  the  testimony  of  witnesses  before  the  Com- 
mittee of  the  House  of  Lords  in  1825.  I  need  quote 
two  answers  only,  given  by  the  Prelate,  wlio  more 
than  any  other  represented,  his  Church,  and  influ- 
enced the  mind  of  this  country  in  favor  of  concession 
at  the  time,  namely,  Bisho])  Doyle.     He  was  asked,* 

"  In  what,  and  how  far,  does  the  Roman  Catholic  profess  to 
obey  the  Pope  ?  " 

*  (Tbmmittees  of  both  Lords  and  Commons  sat ;  the  former 
in  1825,  the  latter  in  1824-5.  The  References  were  identical, 
and  ran  as  follows  :  "  To  inquire  into  the  state  of  Ireland,  more 
particularly  with  reference  to  the  circumstances  which  may  have 
led  to  disturbances  in  that  part  of  the  United  Kingdom." 
Bishop  Doyle  was  examined  March  21,  1825,  and  April  31, 
1825,  before  the  Lords. 


i: 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


31 


He  replied : 

"  The  Catholic  professes  to  obey  the  Pope  in  matters  which 
regard  his  religious  faith  :  and  in  those  matters  of  ecclesiastical 
discipline  which  have  already  been  defined  by  the  competent 
authorities." 

And  again : 

"  Does  that  justify  the  objection  that  is  made  to  Catholics, 
that  their  allegiance  is  divided  ?  " 

"  I  do  not  think  it  does  in  any  way.  We  are  bound  to  obey 
the  Pope  in  those  things  that  I  ha-e  already  mentioned.  But 
our  obedience  to  the  law,  and  the  allegiance  which  we  owe  the 
sovereign,  are  complete,  and  full,  and  perfect,  and  undivided, 
inasmuch  as  they  extend  to  all  political,  legal,  and  civil  rights 
of  t]^e  king  or  his  subjects.  I  think  the  allegiance  due  to  the 
king,  and  the  allegiance  due  to  the  Pope,  are  as  distinct  and  as 
divided  in  their  nature  as  any  two  things  can  possibly  be." 

Such  is  the  opinion  of  the  dead  Prelate.  "VVe 
shall  presently  hear  the  opinion  of  a  living  one. 
But  the  sentiments  of  the  dead  man  powerfully 
operated  on  the  open  and  trustful  temper  of  this 
people  to  induce  them  to  grant,  at  the  cost  of  so 
much  popular  feeling  and  national  tradition,  the 
great  and  just  concession  of  1829.  That  concession, 
without  such  declarations,  it  would,  to  say  the  least, 
have  been  far  more  difficult  to  obtain. 

Now,  bodies  are  usually  held  to  be  bound  by  the 
evidence  of  their  own  selected  and  typical  witnesses. 
But  in  this  instance  the  colleagues  of  those  witnesses 
thought  fit  also  to  Speak  collectively. 

First  let  us  quote  from  the  collective  "  Declara- 
tion," in  the  year  1826,  of  the  Vicars  Apostolic,  who, 


82 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


1^ 


n 


■■  I- 

1: 

'■•til 
■k 


n. 


% 


with  Episcoj^al  authority,  governed  the  Roman  Cath- 
olics of  Great  Britain : 

"The  allegiance  which  Catholics  hold  to  be  due,  and  are 
bound  to  pay,  to  their.  Sovereign,  and  to  the  civil  authority  of 
the  State,  is  perfect  and  undivided.  .  .  . 

"  They  declare  that  neither  the  Pope,  nor  any  other  prelate 
or  ecclesiastical  person  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  .  .  .  has 
any  right  to  interfere,  directly  or  indirectly,  in  the  Civil  Govern- 
ment, .  .  .  nor  to  oppose  in  any  manner  the  performance  of  the 
civil  duties  which  are  due  to  the  king." 

Not  less  explicit  was  the  Hierarchy  of  the  Roman 
Communion  in  its  ''  Pastoral  Address  to  the  Clergy 
and  Laity  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  Ireland," 
dated  January  25, 1826.  This  address  contains  a  Dec- 
laration, from  Avhich  I  extract  the  following  words : 

"  It  is  a  duty  which  they  owe  to  themselves,  as  icell  as  to 
their  JProtestant  fellow-suhjecfs,  whose  good  opinion  they  value, 
to  endeavor  once  more  to  remove  the  false  imputations  that  have 
been  frequently  cast  upon  the  faith  and  discipline  of  that  Church 
which  is  intrusted  to  their  care,  that  all  may  be  enabled  to  Tcnow 
with  accuracy  their  genuine  principles.''^ 

In  Article  11 : — 

"  They  declare  on  oath  their  belief  that  it  is  not  an  article  of 
the  Catholic  Faith,  neither  are  they  thereby  required  to  believe, 
that  the  Pope  is  infallible." 

And,  after  various  recitals,  they  set  forth — 

"  After  this  full,  explicit,  and  sworn  declaration,  we  are 
utterly  at  a  loss  to  conceive  on  what  possible  ground  we  could 
be  justly  charged  with  bearing  towards  our  most  gracious  Sov- 
ereign only  a  divided  allegiance." 

Thus,  besides  much  else  that  I  will  not  stop  to  quote, 


ti- 


IN*  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


33 


Papal  infallibility  was  most  solemnly  declared  to  he 
a  matter  on  wliicli  each  man  might  think  as  he 
pleased ;  the  Pope's  power  to  claim  obedience  was 
strictly  and  narrowly  limited :  it  was  expressly  de- 
nied that  he  had  any  title,  direct  or  indirect,  to  inter- 
fere in  civil  government.  Of  the  right  of  the  Pope 
to  define  the  limits  which  divide  the  civil  from  the 
spiritual  by  his  own  authority,  not  one  word  is  said 
by  the  Prelates  of  either  country. 

Since  that  time,  all  these  propositions  have  been 
reversed.  The  Pope's  infallibility,  when  he  speaks 
ex  caiJiedrd  on  faith  and  morals,  has  been  declared, 
with  the  assent  of  the  Bishops  of  the  Roman  Church, 
to  be  an  article  of  faith,  binding  on  the  conscience 
of  every  Christian  ;  his  claim  to  the  obedience  of  his 
spiritual  subjects  has  been  declared  in  like  manner 
without  any  practical  limit  or  reserve ;  and  his  su- 
premacy, without  any  reserve  of  civil  rights,  has 
been  similarly  affirmed  to  include  eveiything  which 
relates  to  the  discipline  £  id  government  of  the 
Church  throughout  the  world.  And  these  doctrines, 
we  now  know  on  the  highest  authority,  it  is  of  neces- 
sity for  salvation  to  believe. 

Independentl} ,  however,  of  the  Vatican  Decrees 
themselves,  it  is  necessary  for  all  who  wish  to  under- 
stand what  has  been  the  amount  of  the  wonderful 
change  now  consummated  in  the  constitution  of  the 
Latin  Church,  and  what  is  the  present  degradation 


n\  t 


34 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


■I;: 
.■A 


■11: 


of  its  Episcopal  order,  to  observe  also  the  change, 
amounting  to  revolution,  of  form  in  the  present,  as 
compared  witli  other  conciliatory  decrees.  Indeed, 
that  spirit  of  central'^ation,  the  excesses  of  which  are 
as  fatal  to  vigorous  life  in  the  Church  as  in  the  State, 
seems  now  nearly  to  have  reached  the  last  and  fur- 
thest point  of  possible  advancement  and  exaltation. 

When,  in  fact,  we  speak  of  the  decrees  of  the 
Council  of  the  Vatican,  we  use  a  phrase  wliich  will 
not  bear  strict  examination.  The  Canons  of  the 
Council  of  Trent  were,  at  least,  t^ie  real  Canons  of 
a  real  Council :  and  the  strain  in  which  tbey  are 
promulgated  is  this :  Jlcec  sacrosancta,  ecumenica^  et 
generally  Tridentina  Sj/nodus,  in  Spiritu  Sando  le- 
gitime congregata^  in  ed  prcesidentihus  eisdem  trihiis 
rpostolicis  Legatis^  liortatur^  or  docet^  or  statuit^  or 
decernit,  and  the  like :  and  its  canons,  as  published 
in  Rome,  are  "  Canones  et  decreta  Sacrosancti  eoume- 
nici  Concilii  Tridentini,''  *  and  so  forth.  But  what 
we  have  now  to  do  with  is  the  Constitutio  Dog- 
matica  Prima  de  Ecclesid  Ohristi^  edita  in  Sessione 
tert'id  of  the  Vatican  Council.  It  is  not  a  constitu- 
tion made  by  the  Council,  but  one  promulgated  in 
the  Council,  f    And  who  is  it  that  legislates  and 


*  '  Rorna3 :  in  Collegio  urbano  de  Propaganda  Fide.'     1833. 

f  I  am  aware  that,  as  some  hold,  this  was  the  case  with  the 
Counoii  of  the  Lateran  in  A.  D.  1215.  But,  first,  this  has  not  been 
established :  secondly,  the  v^ry  gist  of  the  evil  we  are  dealing 


!;• 


IN  TlIEIll  IJEAIllNG  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.         35 

decrees  ?  It  is  Pius  Ej^i8copu8^  servus  servorum 
Dei :  and  tlie  seductive  plural  of  Lis  doceinKS  et  de- 
claramus  is  simply  tlie  dignified  and  ceremonious 
"  We "  of  Royal  declarations.  Tlie  document  is 
dated  Pontificatus  7iostri  Anno  XXV:  and  tlie  hum- 
ble share  of  the  assembled  Episcopate  in  the  trans- 
action is  represented  by  sacro  approhante  concillo. 
And  now  for  the  propositions  themselves. 
First  comes  the  Pope's  infallibility : — 

"  Docenius,  ct  divinit'is  revelatum  dogma  esse  defuiimus, 
Ronianum  Pontificcm,  cum  ex  Cathednl  loquitur,  id  est  cum, 
omnium  Christianorum  Pastoris  et  Doctoris  munere  fungens, 
pro  supremA  sua  ApostoliciX  auctoritate  doctrinam  de  fide  vol 
uioribus  ab  universd  Ecclesia  teneudam  definit,  per  assistcntiam 
divinam,  ipsi  in  Beato  Petro  promissam,  eA  infallibilitate  pollere, 
quit  Divinus  Redemptor  Ecclesiam  suam  in  definiendtl  doctrind 
de  fide  vel  moribus  instructam  esse  voluit :  ideoque  ejus  Romani 
Pontificis  definitiones  ex  sese  non  autem  ex  consensu  Ecclesire 
irreformabiles  esse."  * 

"Will  it,  then,  be  said  that  the  infallibility  of  the 
Pope  accrues  only  when  he  speaks  ex  cathedra  ?  No 
doubt  this  is  a  very  material  consideration  for  those 
who  have  been  told  that  the  private  conscience  is  to 
derive  comfort  and  assurance  from  the  emanations 
of  the  Papal  Chair :  for  there  is  no  established  or 
accepted  definition  of  the  phrase  ex  cathedra,  and  he 
has  no  power  to  obtain  one,  and  no  guide  to  direct 

witli  consists  in  following  (and  enforcing)  precedents  from  the 
age  of  Pope  Innocent  III. 

*  '  Constitutio  de  Ecclesia,'  c.  iv. 


-1. 


30 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


i 


J? . 

1: 


:-k 


fe 


liim  in  liis  choice  among  some  twelve  theories  on 
the  subject,  which,  it  is  said,  are  bandied  to  and  fro 
among  Roman  theologians,  except  the  despised  and 
discarded  agency  of  his  private  judgment.  But 
while  thus  jorely  tantalised,  he  is  not  one  whit 
protected.  For  there  is  still  one  person,  and  one 
only,  who  can  unquestionably  (declare  ex  cathedrd 
what  is  ex  cathedrd  and  what  is  not,  and  who  can 
declare  it  when  and  as  he  pleases.  That  person  is 
the  Pope  himself.  The  provision  is,  that  no  docu- 
ment he  issues  shall  be  valid  without  a  seal ;  but 
the  seal  remains  under  his  own  sole  lock  and  key. 

Again,  it  may  be  sought  to  plead,  that  the  Pope 
is,  after  all,  only  operating  by  sanctions  which  un- 
questionably belong  to  the  religious  domain.  He 
does  not  propose  to  inv^ade  the  country,  to  seize 
Woohvich,  or  burn  Portsmouth.  He  will  only,  at 
the  worst,  excommunicate  opponents,  as  he  has  ex- 
communicated Dr.  von  DoUinger  and  others.  Is 
this  a  good  answer  ?  After  all,  even  in  the  Middle 
Ages,  it  was  not  by  the  direct  action  of  fleets  and 
armies  of  their  own  that  the  Popes  contended  with 
kings  who  were  refractory;  it  was  icdnly  by  inter- 
dicts, and  by  the  refusal,  which  thev  entailed  when 
the  Bishops  w^ere  not  brave  enough  to  refuse  their 
publication,  of  religious  offices  to  the  people.  It 
was  thus  that  England  suffered  under  John,  France 
under  Philip  Augustus,  Leon  under  Alphonso  the 


1 1- 


LV  THEIR  BEARIXG   0!^  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


37 


Noble,  and  every  country  in  its  turn.  But  the  in- 
ference may  be  drawn  that  tlicy  who,  wlule  ushig 
spiritual  weapons  for  sucli  an  end,  do  not  employ 
temporal  means,  only  fail  to  employ  tlieni  because 
they  liavc  them  not.  A  religious  society,  which  de- 
livers volleys  of  spiritual  censures  in  order  to  im- 
pede  the  performance  of  civil  duties,  does  all  the 
miscLief  that  is  in  its  power  to  do,  and  brings  into 
question,  in  the  face  of  the  State,  its  title  to  civil 
protection. 

Will  it  be  said,  finally,  that  the  Infallibility 
touches  only  matter  of  faith  and  morals  'i  Only  mat- 
ter of  morals !  Will  any  of  tlie  Roman  casuists 
I'.indly  acquaint  us  what  are  the  departments  and 
functions  of  human  life  which  do  not  and  cannot  fall 
within  the  domain  of  morals  ?  If  they  will  not  tell 
us,  we  must  look  elsewhere.  In  his  work  entitled 
"  Literature  and  Dogma,"  *  Mr.  Matthew  Arnold 
quaintly  infoi'ms  us — as  they  tell  us  nowadays  ho^v 
many  parts  of  our  poor  bodies  are  solid,  and  how 
many  aqueous — that  about  seventy-five  per  cent,  of 
all  we  do  belongs  to  the  department  of  "  conduct." 
Conduct  and  morals,  we  may  suppose,  are  nearly  co- 
extensive. Three  -  fourths,  then,  of  life  are  thus 
handed  over.  But  who  will  guarantee  to  us  the 
other  fourth?     Certainly  not  St.  Paul;   wdio  says, 


Pages  15,  44. 


38 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


''^ 


4r 


I 


I. 


^■ 


Ik 


"  Whether  therefore  ye  eat,  or  driuk,  or  whatsoever 
ye  do,  do  oil  to  the  glory  of  God."  And  "  Whatso- 
ever ye  do,  in  word  or  in  deed,  do  all  in  the  name 
of  tlie  Lord  Jesus."*  No!  Such  a  distinction 
-vvouhl  be  the  unworthy  device  of  a  shallow  policy, 
vainly  used  to  hide  the  daring  of  that  wild  ambition 
which  at  Rome,  not  from  the  throne  but  from  b^^- 
liind  the  throne,  prompts  the  movements  of  the  Vat- 
ican. I  care  not  to  ask  if  there  be  dregs  or  tatters 
of  human  life,  such  as  can  escape  from  the  descrip- 
tion and  boundary  of  morals.  I  submit  that  Duty 
is  a  jiower  which  rises  with  us  in  the  morning,  and 
goes  to  rest  with  us  at  night.  It  is  co-extensive 
with  the  action  of  our  intelligence.  It  is  the  shad- 
ow which  cleaves  to  us,  go  where  we  w^ill,  and  wdiich 
only  leaves  us  \vlien  we  leave  the  light  of  life.  So, 
then,  it  is  the  supreme  direction  of  us  in  respect  to 
all  Duty,  ^^•hich  the  Pontitf  declares  to  belong  to 
him,  sacrc  approhante  concillo :  and  this  declaration 
he  makes,  not  as  an  otiose  opinion  of  tlie  schools, 
but  cunctls  fidellhis  credendam  et  tenendam. 

But  we  shall  now  see  that,  even  if  a  loophole  had 
at  this  2^oint  been  left  unclosed,  the  void  is  supj^lied 
by  another  pro^'ision  of  the  Decrees.  While  the 
reach  of  the  Infallibility  is  as  wide  as  it  may  please 
the  Pope,  or  those  who  may  prompt  the  Pope,  to 


*  1  Cor.  X.  31 ;  Col.  iii.  7. 


IN   THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


39 


make  it,  tLere  is  sonietliiug  wider  still,  and  tliat  is 
the  claim  to  an  absolute  and  entire  Obedience.  Tliis 
Obedience  is  to  be  rendered  to  liis  orders  in  the  cases 
I  shall  proceed  to  point  out,  without  any  qualifying 
condition,  sucli  as  tlie  ex  catltedrcL  The  sounding 
name  of  Infallibility  lias  so  fascinated  the  public 
mind,  and  riveted  it  on  the  Fourth  Chapter  of  the 
Constitution  de  Ecdesid^  that  its  near  neighbor,  the 
Third  Chapter,  has,  at  least  in  my  opinion,  received 
very  much  less  than  justice.     Let  us  turn  to  it : 

"  Cujuscuiique  ritds  et  dignitatis  pastorcs  atque  fideles,  tarn 
seorsu'  singuli  quam  simul  omiics,  officio  liierarchicoB  subordi- 
imtionis  veraeque  obedientiic  obstriuguntur,  non  solum  in  rebus, 
qua3  ad  fidem  ct  mores,  sed  etiam  in  iis,  quas  ad  disciplinam  et 
regimen  Ecclcsiffi  per  totum  orbem  diffusae  pertinent.  .  .  .  H:ec 
est  Catliollcaj  veritatia  doctrina,  a  qua  deviare,  salva  fide  atque 
salute,  nemo  potest.  .  .  . 

"  Docemus  etiam  et  declara\iius  cum  esse  judicem  suprcmum 
(ideiium,  et  in  omnibus  causis  ad  examen  ecclesiasticum  spec- 
tantibvis  ad  ipsius  posse  judicium  recurri :  Sedis  vero  Apostolicn?, 
cujns  auctoritate  major  non  est,  judicium  a  nemine  fore  rr^trac 
tandum.     Neque  cuiquam  de  ejus  licere  judicare  judicio."  * 

Even,  therefore,  where  the  judgments  of  the  Poj)e 
do  not  present  the  credentials  of  infallibility,  they 
are  unappealable  and  irreversible :  no  person  may  pass 
judgment  upon  them  ;  and  all  men,  clei'ical  and  lay, 
dispersedly  or  in  the  aggregate,  are  bound  truly  to 
obey  them  ;  and  from  this  rule  of  Catholic  truth  no 
man  can  depart,  E-a\     iit  the  peril  of  his  salvation. 


*  "  Dogmatic  Constitutions,"  etc.,  c.  iii.   Dublin,  1870,  pp.  30-33. 


40 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


It*. 


>' 


It .,  • 


rk 


hi 


Surely,  it  is  allowaljle  to  say  that  tLis  Tliird  Cliapter 
on  universal  obedience  is  a  formidable  lival  to  the 
Fourth  Chapter  on  iDfallibility.  Indeed,  to  an  ob- 
server from  without,  it  seems  to  leave  the  dignity  to 
the  other,  but  to  reserve  the  stringency  and  efficiency 
to  itself.  The  Third  Chaj^ter  is  the  Merovingian 
Monarch ;  the  fourth  is  the  Carol  ingian  Mayor  of  the 
Palace.  The  third  has  an  overawing  sj^lendor ;  the 
fourth,  an  iron  grij)e.  Little  does  it  matter  to  me 
whether  my  superior  claims  infallibility,  so  long  as 
he  is  entitled  to  demand  and  exact  conformity.  This, 
it  will  be  observed,  he  demands  even  in  cases  not 
covered  by  his  infallibility ;  cases,  therefore,  in  which 
he  admits  it  to  be  possible  that  he  may  be  wrong,  but 
finds  it  intolerable  to  be  told  so.  As  he  must  be 
obeyed  in  all  his  judgments  though  not  ex  catJiedrd, 
it  seems  a  pity  he  could  not  likewise  give  the  com- 
forting assurance  that  they  are  all  certain  to  be 
right. 

But  why  this  ostensible  reduplication,  this  ap- 
parent surplusage  ?  Why  did  the  astute  contrivers 
of  this  tangled  scheme  conclude  that  they  could  not 
afford  to  rest  content  with  pledging  the  Council  to 
Infallibility  in  terms  which  are  not  only  wide  to  a 
high  degree,  but  elastic  beyond  all  measure  ? 

Though  they  must  have  known  perfectly  well  that 
"  faith  and  morals  "  carried  everything,  or  everything 
worth  having,  in  the  purely  individual  sphere,  they 


IN  TIIEir.  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.         41 


) 


also  knew  just  as  well  that,  even  where  the  individual 
was  subjugated,  they  might  and  would  still  have  to 
deal  with  the  State. 

In  mediaeval  history,  this  distinction  is  not  only 
clear  hut  glaring.  Outside  the  borders  of  some 
narrow  and  proscribed  sect,  now  and  then  emerging, 
w^e  nevor,  or  scarcely  ever,  hear  of  private  and  per- 
sonal resistance  to  the  Pope.  The  manful  "Prot- 
estantism "  of  mediseval  times  had  its  activity  almost 
entirely  in  the  sphere  of  public,  national,  and  state 
rights.  Too  much  attention,  in  my  opinion,  cannot 
be  fastened  on  this  point.  It  is  the  very  root  and 
kernel  of  the  matter.  Individual  servitude,  however 
abject,  will  not  satisfy  the  party  now  dominant  in 
the  Latin  Church :  the  State  must  also  be  a  slave. 

Our  Saviour  had  recognised  as  distinct  the  two 
provinces  of  the  civil  rule  and  the  Church :  had  no- 
where intimated  that  the  spiritual  authority  was  to 
claim  the  disposal  of  physical  force,  and  to  control  in 
its  own  domain  the  authority  which  is  alone  respon- 
sible for  external  peace,  order,  and  safety  among 
civilised  communities  of  men.  It  has  been  alike  the 
■ )  ^ealiarity,  the  pride,  and  the  misfortune  of  the 
9  >man  Church,  among  Christian  communities,  to 
allow  to  itself  an  unbounded  use,  as  far  as  its  power 
would  go,  of  earthly  instruments  for  spiritual  ends. 
We  have  seen  with  what   ample  assurances*  this 

*  See  further,  Appendix  B. 


t2 


THE  VATICAN   DECREES 


I 


[S 


h 
I 


1 

m, 

\B 

H 

it: 


1 


nation  and  Parliament  were  fed  in  182G  ;  liow  well 
and  roundly  tlie  full  and  undivided  riglits  of  the 
civil  power,  and  the  separation  of  the  two  jui'isdie- 
tions,  were  affirmed.  All  this  liad  ut  length  been 
undone,  as  far  as  Popes  could  undo  it,  in  the  Syl- 
labus and  the  Encyclical.  It  remained  to  complete 
the  undoing,  through  the  subserviency  or  pliability 
of  the  Council. 

And  the  work  is  now  truly  complete.  Lest  it 
should  be  said  that  supremacy  in  faith  and  morals, 
full  dominion  over  perr-i'al  belief  and  conduct,  did 
not  cover  the  collective  ,  'U  of  men  in  States,  a 
third  jDrovince  was  opened,  not  indeed  to  the  ab- 
stract •  assertion  of  Infallibility,  but  to  the  far  more 
practical  and  decisive  demand  of  absolute  Obedience. 
And  this  is  the  proper  work  of  the  Third  Chapter, 
to  which  I  am  endeavoring  to  do  a  tardy  justice. 
Let  us  listen  again  to  its  few  but  pregnant  words 
on  the  jwint : 

"Non  solum  in  rebus,  quqe  ad  fidem  et  mores,  sed  etiam  in 
iis,  quas  ad  disciplinam  et  regimen  Ecelesioe  per  totum  orLem 
diffusa^  pertinent.' 

Absolute  obedience,  it  is  boldly  declared,  is  due 
to  the  Pope,  at  the  peril  of  salvation,  not  alone  in 
faith,  in  morals,  but  in  all  things  which  concern  the 
discipline  and  government  of  the  Church.  Thus  are 
swept  into  the  Papal  net  w^hole  multitudes  of  facts, 
whole  systems  of  government,  prevailing,  though  in 


♦     . 


IN  THEIR  BEARIXG  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


43 


different  degrees,  in  every  country  of  the  world. 
Even  in  tlie  United  States,  where  the  severance  be- 
tween Churcli  and  f^l-ate  is  supposed  to  be  comjolete, 
a  long  catalogue  niiglit  be  drawn  of  subjects  belong- 
ing to  the  domain  and  competency  of  the  State,  but 
also  undeniably  affecting  the  government  of  the 
Churcli ;  such  as,  by  way  of  example,  marriage,  bur- 
ial, education,  prison  discipline,  blasphemy,  poor-re- 
lief, incorporation,  mortmain,  religious  endowments, 
vows  of  celibacy  and  obedience.  In  Europe  the  cir- 
cle is  far  wider,  the  points  of  contact  and  of  inter- 
lacing almost  innumerable.  But  on  all  matters,  re- 
specting which  any  Pope  may  think  proper  to  de- 
clare that  they  concern  either  faith,  or  morals,  or 
the  government  or  discipline  of  the  Church,  he 
claims,  with  the  apj)roval  of  a  Council  undoubtedly 
Ecumenical  in  the  Roman  sense,  the  absolute  obedi- 
ence, at  the  peril  of  salvation,  of  every  member  of 
his  communion. 

It  seems  not  as  yet  to  have  been  thought  wise  to 
l^ledge  the  Council  in  terms  to  the  Syllabus  and  the 
Encyclical.  'L.'hat  achievement  is  probably  reserved 
for  some  one  of  its  sittings  yet  to  come.  In  the 
meantime  it  is  well  to  remember,  that  this  claim  in 
respect  of  all  things  affecting  the  discipline  and  gov^- 
ernment  of  the  Church,  as  well  as  fiith  and  con- 
duct, is  lodged  in  open  day  by  and  m  the  reign  of 
a  Pontiff,  who  has  condemned  free  speech,  free  writ- 


•9f 


Jiff  I 


III 


M 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


ni!_ 


IK 

it" 


li 


I 


ing,  a  free  press,  toleration  of  nonconformity,  lib- 
erty of  conscience,  tlie  study  of  civil  and  philosophi- 
cal matters  in  independence  of  tlie  ecclesiastical  au- 
thority, marriage  unless  sacramentally  contracted, 
and  the  definixion  by  the  State  of  the  civil  rights 
(jwa)  of  the  Church ;  who  has  demanded  for  the 
Church,  therefore,  the  title  to  define  its  own  civil 
rights,  together  with  a  divine  right  to  civil  immuni- 
ties, and  a  right  to  use  j)hysical  force ;  and  who  has 
also  proudly  asserted  that  the  Popes  of  the  Middle 
Ages  with  their  councils  did  not  invade  the  rights  of 
princes :  as  for  example,  Gregory  VIL,  of  the  Em- 
peror Henry  IV. ;  Innocent  III.,  of  Raymond  of  Tou- 
louse ;  Paul  III.,  in  deposing  Henry  YHI. ;  or  Pius  V., 
in  performing  th§  like  paternal  office  for  Elizabeth. 

I  submit,  then,  that  my  fourth  proposition  is  true : 
and  that  England  is  entitled  to  ask,  and  to  know,  in 
what  way  the  obedience  required  by  the  Pope  and 
the  Council  of  the  Vatican  is  to  be  reconciled  with 
the  integrity  of  civil  allegiance  ? 

It  has  been  shown  that  the  Head  of  their  Church, 
so  supported  as  undoubtedly  to  speak  with  its  high- 
est authority,  claims  from  Eoman  Catholics  a  plenary 
obedience  to  w^hatever  he  may  desire  in  relation  not 
to  faith  but  to  morals,  and  not  only  to  these,  but  to 
all  that  concerns  the  government  and  discipline  of 
the  Church:  that,  of  this,  much  lies  within  the 
domain  of  the  State :  that,  to  obviate  all  misappre- 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


45 


heusion,  the  Pope  demands  for  himself  the  right  to 
determine  the  province  of  his  own  rights,  and  has  so 
defined  it  in  formal  documents,  as  to  warrant  any 
and  every  invasion  of  th  civil  sphere ;  and  that  this 
new  version  of  the  principles  of  the  Papal  Church  in- 
exorably  binds  its  members  to  the  admission  of  these 
exorbitant  claims,  without  any  refuge  or  reservation 
on  behalf  of  their  duty  to  the  Crown. 

Under  circumstances  such  as  these,  it  seems  not 
too  much  to  ask  of  them  to  confirm  the  opinion  which 
we,  as  fellow-countrymen,  entertain  of  them,  by  sweep- 
ing away,  in  such  manner  and  terms  as  they  may 
think  best,  the  presumptive  imputations  which  their 
ecclesiastical  rulers  at  Rome,  acting  autocratically, 
appear  to  have  brought  upon  their  capacity  to  pay  a 
solid  and  undivided  allegiance;  and  to  fulfil  the 
engagement  which  their  bishops,  as  political  spon- 
sors, promised  and  declared  for  them  in  1825. 

It  would  be  impertinent,  as  well  as  needless,  to 
suggest  what  should  be  said.  All  that  is  requisite  is 
to  indicate  in  substance  that  which  (if  the  foregoing 
argument  be  sound)  is  not  wanted,  and  that  which 
is.  What  is  not  wanted  is  vague  and  general  asser- 
tion, of  whatever  kind,  and  however  sincere.  What 
is  wanted,  and  that  in  the  most  specific  form  and  the 
clearest  terms,  I  take  to  be  one  of  two  things ;  that 
is  to  say,  either — 

I.  A  der'.onstration  that  neither  in  the  name  of 


i6 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


H 


\mi 


M  ■ 

i 

I 


nv«! 


m 


3i 


■'■'  ! 


Iff"' 

1  i'lV 


m 


faith,  nor  in  the  name  of  morals,  nor  in  the  name  of 
the  government  or  discipline  of  the  Church,  is  the 
Pope  of  Rome  able,  by  virtue  of  the  powers  asserted 
for  him  by  the  Vatican  decree,  to  make  any  claim 
upon  those  who  adhere  to  his  communion,  of  such  a 
nature  as  can  impair  the  integrity  of  their  civil  alle- 
giance ;  or  else, 

II.  That,  if  and  when  such  claim  is  made,  it  will, 
even  although  resting  on  the  definitions  of  the  Vati- 
can, be  repelled  and  rejected ;  just  as  Bishop  Doyle, 
when  he  w^as  asked  what  the  Roman  Catholic  clergy 
would  do  if  the  Pope  intermeddled  with  their  reli- 
gion, rejilied  frankly,  "  The  consequence  would  be, 
that  we  should,  oppose  him  by  every  means  in  our 
power,  even  by  the  exercise  of  our  spiritual  author- 
ity." * 

In  the  absence  of  explicit  assurances  to  this  ef- 
fect, we  should  appear  to  be  led,  nay,  driven,  by  just 
reasoning  upon  that  documentary  evidence,  to  the 
conclusions : — 

1.  That  the  Pope,  authorized  by  his  Council, 
claims  for  himself  the  domain  (a)  of  faith,  (5)  of 
morals,  (<?)  of  all  that  concerns  the  government  and 
discipline  of  the  Church. 

2.  That  he  in  like  mariner  claims  the  j)ower  of 
determining  the  limits  of  those  domains. 

3.  That  he  does  not  sever  them,  by  any  acknowl-  • 


*  t 


Report,'  March  18,  1826,  p.  191. 


i 


a!: 


1^^ 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


47 


edged  or  intelligible  line,  fiom  the  domains  of  civil 
duty  and  allegiance. 

4.  That  he  therefore  claims,  and  claims  from  the 
month  of  July,  1870,  onward  with  plenary  authority, 
from  every  convert  and  member  of  his  Church,  that 
he  shall  "place  his  loyalty  and  civil  duty  at  the 
mercy  of  another : "  that  other  being  himself. 


m 


"V.  BsiifG  True,  are  the  Proposition's  Material  ? 

But  next,  if  these  propositions  be  true,  are  they 
also  material  ?  The  claims  cannot,  as  I  much  fear,  be 
denied  to  have  been  made.  It  cannot  be  denied  that 
the  Bishops,  who  govern  in  things  spiritual  more 
than  five  millions  (or  nearly  one-sixth)  of  the  inhab- 
itants of  the  United  Kingdom,  have  in  some  cases 
promoted,  in  all  cases  accepted,  these  claims.  It  has 
been  a  favorite  purpose  of  my  life  not  to  conjure 
up,  but  to  conjure  down,  public  alarms.  I  am  not 
now  going  to  pretend  that  either  foreign  foe  or  do- 
mestic treason  can,  at  the  bidding  of  the  Court  of 
Rome,  disturb  these  peaceful  shores.  But  though 
such  fears  may  be  visionary,  it  is  more  visionary  still 
to  suppose  for  one  moment  that  the  claims  of  Greg- 
ory YIL,  of  Innocent  III.,  and  of  Boniface  VIII., 
have  been  disinterred,  in  the  nineteenth  century, 
like  hideous  mummies  picked  out  of  Egyptian  sar- 
cophagi, in  the  interests  of  archaeology,  or  without 


48 


TUE- VATICAN  DECREES 


11  definite  aud  practical  aim.  As  rational  beings,  we 
must  rest  assured  that  only  witli  a  very  clearly  con- 
ceived and  foregone  purpose  have  these  astonishing 
reassertions  been  paraded  before  the  world.  What 
is  that  purpose  ? 

I  can  well  believe  that  it  is  in  part  theological. 
There  have  always  been,  and  there  still  are,  no  small 
proportion  of  our  race,  and  those  by  no  means  in  all 
respects  the  worst,  who  are  sorely  open  to  the  temp- 
tation, especially  in  times  of  religious  disturbance, 
to  discharge  their  spiritual  responsibilities  \\j  poioer 
of  attorney.  As  advertising  Houses  find  custom  in 
proportion,  not  so  much  to  the  solidity  of  their  re- 
sources as  to  the  magniloquence  of  their  premises 
and  assurances,  so  theological  boldness  in  the  exten- 
sion of  such  claims  is  sure  to  pay,  by  widening  cer- 
tain circles  of  devoted  adherents,  however  it  may 
repel  the  mass  of  mankind.  There  were  two  special 
encouragements  to  this  enterprise  at  the  present  day : 
one  of  them  the  perhaps  unconscious  but  manifest 
leaning  of  some,  outside  the  Koman  precinct,  to 
undue  exaltation  of  Church  power;  the  other  the 
reaction,  which  is  and  must  be  brought  about  in 
favor  of  superstition,  by  the  levity  of  the  destruc- 
tive speculations  so  widely  current,  and  the  nota- 
ble hardihood  of  the  anti-Christian  writing  of  the 
day. 

But  it  is  impossible  to  accoTint  sufficiently  in  this 


IN  THEIIl  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


49 


manner  for  tLe  particular  c^mrse  wliicli  Las  heea 
actually  pursued  by  the  Roman  Court.  All  morbid 
spiritual  appetites  would  Lave  been  amply  satisfied 
by  claims  to  infallibility  in  creed,  to  the  prerogative 
of  miracle,  to  dominion  over  tLe  unseen  world.  In 
trutL  tliere  was  occasion,  in  tLis  view,  for  nothing, 
excej^t  a  liberal  supply  of  Salmonean  tLunder : — 

"  Dum  flammas  Jovis,  et  sonitus  imitatur  Olymiii."  * 

All  tLis  could  Lave  been  managed  by  a  few  Tetzels, 
judiciously  distributed  over  Europe.  TLerefore  tLe 
question  still  remains,  WLy  did  tLat  Court,  witL 
policy  for  ever  in  its  eye,  lodge  sucL  formidable 
demands  for  power  of  tLe  vulgar  kind  in  tLat  spLere 
wLicL  is  visible,  and  wLere  Lard  knocks  can  undoubt- 
edly be  given  as  well  as  received  ? 

It  must  be  for  some  political  object,  of  a  very 
tangible  kind,  tLat  tLe  risks  of  so  daring  a  raid  upon 
tLe  civil  spLere  Lave  been  deliberately  run. 

A  daring  raid  it  is.  For  it  is  most  evident  tLat 
tLe  very  assertion  of  principles  wLicL  establisL  an 
exemption  from  allegiance,  oi'  wLicL  impair  its  com- 
pleteness, goes,  in  many  otLer  countries  of  Europe, 
far  more  directly  tLan  witli  us,  to  the  creation  of  po- 
litical strife,  and  to  dangers  of  tLe  most  material  and 
tangible  kind.  TLe  struggle,  now  proceeding  in 
Germany,  at  once  occirs  to  tLe  mind  as  a  palmary 


*  ^u.  vi.  586. 


50 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


i 


instance.  I  am  not  competent  to  give  any  o})inion 
upon  the  pai-ticulars  of  that  struggle.  The  institu- 
tions of  Germany,  and  the  relative  estimate  of  State 
power  and  individual  freedom,  are  mateiially  different 
from  ours.  But  1  must  say  as  much  as  this.  Firstly, 
it  is  not  Prussia  alone  that  is  touched;  elsewhere, 
too,  the  bone  lies  ready,  though  the  contention  may 
be  delayed.  In  other  States,  in  Austria  particularly, 
there  are  recent  laws  in  force,  raising  much  the  same 
issues  as  the  Falck  laws  have  raised.  But  the 
Roman  Court  possesses  in  perfection  one  art,  the  art 
of  waiting ;  and  it  is  her  wise  maxim  to  fight  but 
one  enemy  at  a  time.  Secondly,  if  I  have  truly 
represented  the  claims  promulgated  from  the  Vati- 
can, it  is  difficult  to  deny  that  those  claims,  and  the 
power  which  has  made  them,  are  primarily  respon- 
sible for  the  pains  and  perils,  whatever  they  may  be, 
of  the  present  conflict  between  German  and  Roman 
enactments.  And  that  which  was  once  truly  said  of 
France,  may  now  also  be  said  with  not  less  truth  of 
Germany :  when  Germany  is  disquieted,  Europe  can- 
not be  at  rest. 

I  should  feel  less  anxiety  on  this  subject  had  the 
Supreme  Pontiff  frankly  recognised  his  altered  posi- 
tion since  the  events  of  1870 ;  and,  in  language  as 
clear,  if  not  as  emphatic,  as  that  in  which  he  has  pro- 
scribed modern  civilization,  given  to  Europe  the  as- 
surance that  he  would  be  no  party  to  the  reestablish- 


0 


IN  TIIEIU  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLECJIANCE. 


51 


meut  by  Llood  uiul  violence  of  the  Tem])oml  Power 
of  tlie  Churcli.  It  is  easy  to  conceive  that  his  per- 
sonal  benevolence,  no  less  than  his  feelings  as  an 
Italian,  must  have  inclined  him  individually  towards 
a  course  so  humane  ;  and  I  should  add,  if  I  might  do 
it  without  presumption,  so  prudent.  "With  what 
appears  to  an  English  eye  a  lavish  prodigality,  suc- 
cessiv^o  Italian  Governments  have  made  over  the 
ecclesiastical  powers  and  privileges  of  the  Monarchy, 
not  to  the  Church  of  the  country  for  the  revival  of 
the  ancient,  popular,  and  selfgoverning  elements  of 
its  constitution,  but  to  the  Papal  Chair,  for  the  estab- 
lishment of  ecclesiastical  despotism,  and  the  sup- 
pression of  the  last  vestiges  of  independence.  This 
course,  so  difficult  for  a  foreigner  to  appreciate,  or 
even  to  justify,  has  been  met,  not  oy  reciprocal  con- 
ciliation, but  by  a  constant  fire  of  denunciations  and 
complaints.  When  the  tone  of  these  denunciations 
and  complaints  is  compared  with  the  language  of  the 
authorised  and  favored  Papal  organs  in  the  press,  and 
of  the  Ultramontane  party  (now  the  sole  legitimate 
party  of  the  Latin  Church)  throughout  Europe,  it 
leads  many  to  the  painful  and  revolting  conclusion 
that  there  is  a  fixed  purpose  among  the  secret  in- 
spirers  of  Roman  policy  to  pursue,  by  the  road  of 
force,  upon  the  arrival  of  any  favorable  opportunity, 
the  favorite  project  of  reerecting  the  terrestrial 
throne  of  the  Popedom,  even  if  it  can  only  be  re- 


i 


52 


THE  VATICAN   DECREES 


Ni. 


■f, 


m 


m 


.'C>' 


•    hit      :     t 


erected  on  the  «islies  of  me  city,  and   amidst  the 
whitening  bones  of  the  people.  * 

It  is  difficult  to  conceive  or  contemplate  tLc 
effects  of  such  an  endeavor.  But  the  existence  at 
this  day  of  the  policy,  even  in  bare  idea,  is  itself  a 
portentous  cil.  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  it  is 
an  incentive  to  general  disturbance,  a  premium  upon 
European  wars.  It  is  in  my  opinion  not  sanguine 
only,  but  almost  ridiculous  to  imagine  that  such  a 
project  could  eventually  succeed ;  but  it  is  difficult 
to  over-estimate  the  effect  which  it  might  produce  in 
generating  and  exasperating  strife.  It  might  even, 
to  some  exte^^t,  disturb  and  paralyse  the  action  of 
such  Governments  as  might  interpose  for  no  separate 
purpose  of  their  own,  but  only  with  a  view  to  the 
maintenance  or  restoration  of  the  general  peace.  If 
the  baleful  Power  which  is  expressed  by  the  phrase 
Curia  Homana,  and  not  at  all  adequately  rendered  in 
its  historic  force  by  the  usual  English  equivalent 
*'  Court  of  Rome,"  really  entertains  the  scheme,  it 
doubtless  counts  on  the  supj^ort  in  every  country  of 
an  organised  and  devoted  party  ;  which,  when  it  can 
command  the  scales  of  j^olitical  power,  will  promote 
interference,  and,  when  it  is  in  a  minority,  will  work 
for  securing  neutrality.  As  the  peace  of  Europe  may 
be  in  jeopardy,  and  as  the  duties  even  of  England, 


*  Appendix  C. 


'■■'  -■ 


IN"  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE.         53 


, 


as  one  (so  to  speak)  of  its  constabulary  authorities, 
might  come  to  be  in  question,  it  would  be  most 
interesting  to  know  the  mental  attitude  of  our 
Roman  Catholic  fellow-countrymen  in  England  and 
Ireland  with  reference  to  the  subject;  and  it  seems 
to  be  one  on  which  we  are  entitled  to  solicit  infor- 
mation. 

For  there  cannot  be  the  smallest  doubt  that  the 
temporal  power  of  the  Popedom  comes  within  the 
true  meaning  of  the  words  used  at  the  Vatican  to 
describe  the  subjects  on  which  the  Pope  is  authorized 
to  claim,  under  awful  sanctions,  the  obedience  of  the 
"faithful."  It  is  even  possible  that  we  have  here 
the  key  to  the  enlargement  of  the  province  of  Obe- 
dience beyond  the  limits  of  Infallibility,  and  to  the 
introduction  of  the  remarkable  phrase  ad  disciplinam 
et  regimen  J^cclesiee.  No  impartial  person  can  deny 
that  the  question  of  the  temporal  power  very  evi- 
dently concerns  the  discipline  and  government  of 
the  Church — concerns  it,  and  most  mischievously  as 
I  should  venture  to  think ;  but  in  the  opinion,  up  to 
a  late  date,  of  many  Roman  Catholics,  not  only  most 
beneficially,  but  even  essentially.  Let  it  be  remem- 
bered, that  such  a  man  as  the  late  Count  Montalem- 
bert,  who  in  his  general  politics  was  of  the  Libera] 
party,  did  not  scruple  to  hold  that  the  !ii?nions  of 
Roman  Catholics  ■*^hroughout  the  world  were  co 
partners  with  the  inhabitants  of  the  States  of  the 


ill 

.11 


m 


■h 


I 

•■-fi' 


\4 


? 


ill' 


m 


I'M 

nhr 


I' 


I? 

m 


54 


THE  VATICAN"  DECREES 


Churcli  in  regard  to  tlieir  civil  government ;  and,  as 
constituting  the  vast  majority,  were  of  course  entitled 
to  override  them.  It  was  also  rather  commonly 
held,  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago,  that  the  question 
of  the  States  of  the  Church  was  one  with  ^vhich 
none  Ijut  Pom  an  Catholic  powers  could  have  any 
thing  to  do.  This  doctrine,  I  must  own,  was  to  me 
at  all  times  unintelligible.  It  is  now,  to  say  the 
least,  hopelessly  and  irrecoverably  obsolete. 

Archbishop  Manning,  who  is  the  head  of  the 
Papal  Church  in  England,  and  whose  ecclesiastical 
tone  is  suj)posed  to  be  in  the  closest  accordance  with 
that  of  his  headquarters,  has  not  thought  it  too 
much  to  say  that  the  civil  order  of  all  Christendom 
is  the  offspring  of  the  Temporal  Power,  and  has  the 
Temporal  Power  for  its  keystone ;  that  on  the  de- 
struction of  the  Temporal  Power  "  the  laws  of  nations 
would  at  once  fall  in  ruins ; "  that  (our  old  friend) 
the  deposing  Power  "  taught  subjects  obedience  and 
princes  clemency."*  Nay,  this  high  authority  has 
proceeded  further;  and  has  elevated  the  Temporal 
Power  to  the  rank  of  necessary  doctrine : 

"  The  Catholic  Church  cannot  be  silent,  it  cannot  hold  its 
peace ;  it  cannot  cease  to  preach  the  doctrines  of  Revelation, 
not  only  of  the  Trinity  and  of  the  Incarnation,  but  likewise  of 
the  Seven  Sacraments,  and  of  the  Infallibility  of  the  Church  of 

*  '  Three   Lectures   on   the   Temporal    Sovereignty   of  the  . 
Popes,'  1860,  pp.  34,  46,  47,  58-9,  63. 


I  *  * 

it 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


55 


God,  and  of  the  necessity  of  Unity,  and  of  the  Sovereignty,  both 
epiritual  and  temporal,  of  the  Holy  See."  * 

I  never,  for  my  own  part,  heard  that  tlie  work 
containing  this  remarkable  passage  was  placed  in 
the  'Index  Proliibitorum  Librorum.'  On  the  con- 
trary, its  distinguished  author  was  elevated,  on  the 
first  opportunity,  to  the  headship  of  the  Eoman 
Episcopacy  in  England,  and  to  the  guidance  of  the 
million  or  thereabouts  of  souls  in  its  communion. 
And  the  more  recent  utterances  of  the  oracle  have 
not  descended  from  the  high  level  of  those  already 
cited.  They  have,  indeed,  the  recommendation  of  a 
comment,  not  without  fair  claims  to  authority,  on 
the  recent  declarations  of  the  Pope  and  the  Coun- 
cil ;  and  of  one  which  goes  to  prove  how  far  I  am 
jrom  having  exaggerated  or  strained  in  the  foregoing 
pages  the  meaning  of  those  declarations.  Especially 
does  this  hold  good  on  the  one  j^oint,  the  most  vital 
of  the  whole — the  title  to  define  the  border  line  of 
the  two  provinces,  which  the  Archbishop  not  unfair- 
ly takes  to  be  the  true  criteri  of  supremacy,  as 
between  ri-al  powers  like  the  Church  and  f  he  State. 

"  If,  then,  the  civil  power  be  not  competeuL  to  decide  tbt 
limits  of  the  spiritual  power,  and  if  the-  spiritual  power  can  de- 
fine, with  a  divine  certainty,  its  own  limits,  it  is  evidently  su- 
preme. Or,  in  other  words,  the  spiritual  power  knows,  tli 
divine  certainty,  the  limits  of  its  own  jurisdiction  :  and  it  k   uws 


*  'The  present  Crisis  of  the  Holy  See.'     By  H.  E.  Manniijj^. 
D.D.    London,  1861,  p.  73. 


TV 

ft 


56 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


II 


n0 


\.-,i 


m 


I'"  !■■•; 

■I 

-I 


sift' 


•V' 


,;l 


m 


therefore  the  limits  and  the  competence  of  the  civil  poAver.  It 
is  thereby,  in  matters  of  religion  and  conscience,  supreme.  I  do 
not  see  how  this  can  be  denied  without  denyiiig  Christianity. 
And  if  this  be  so,  this  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Bull  Unam  Sanctum* 
and  of  the  Syllabus,  and  of  the  Vatican  C  >uncil.  It  is,  in  fact, 
Ultramontanism,  for  this  term  means  neither  less  nor  more.  The 
Church,  therefore,  is  separate  and  supreme. 

"  Let  us  then  ascertain  somewhat  further  what  is  the  mean- 
ing of  supreme.  Any  power  which  is  independent,  and  can 
alone  fix  the  limits  of  its  own  jurisdiction^  and  can  thereby  fix 
the  limits  of  all  other  jurisdictions^  is,  ipso  facto,  supreme^  But 
the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ,  within  the  sphere  of  revelation,  of 
faith  and  morals,  is  all  this,  or  is  nothing,  or  worse  than  nothing, 
an  imposture  and  an  usurpation — that  is,  it  is  Christ  or  Anti- 
christ." I 

But  tlie  whole  panipl'let  should  be  read  by  those 
who  desire  to  know  the  true  sense  of  the  Papal  dec- 
larations and  Vatican  decrees,  as  they  are  understood 
by  the  most  favored  ecclesiastics ;  understood,  I  am 
bound  to  own,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  in  their  natural, 
legitimate,  and  inevitable  sense.  Such  readers  will 
be  assisted  by  the  treatise  in  seeing  clearly,  and  in 
admitting  frankly  that,  whatever  demands  may  here- 
after, and  in  whatever  circumstances,  be  made  upon 
us,  we  shall  be  unable  to  advance  with  any  fairness 
tiie  plea  that  it  has  been  done  without  due  notice. 

There  are  millions  upon  millions  of  the  Protestants 

*  On  the  Bull  Unam  jSanctam^  "  of  a  most  odious  kind ; " 
see  Bishop  Doyle's  Essay,  already  cited.     He  thus  describes  it. 

t  The  italics  are  not  in  the  original. 

I '  Caesarism  and  Ultramontanism.'  By  Archbishop  Manning, 
1874,  pp.  35-6. 


;.(*« 


i:^  THEIR  B.EARING  OX  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


57 


of  this  conntiy  who  would  agree  with  Archbishop 
Manning,  if  he  were  simply  telling  ns  that  Divine 
truth  is  not  tc  be  sought  from  the  lips  of  the  State, 
nor  to  be  sacrificed  at  its  command.  But  those 
millions  would  tell  him,  in  return,  that  the  State,  as 
the  power  which  is  alone  responsible  for  the  external 
order  of  the  world,  can  alone  conclusively  and  finally 
be  competent  to  determine  what  is  to  take  place  in 
the  sphere  of  that  external  order. 

I  have  shown,  then,  that  the  Propositions,  espe- 
cially that  which  has  been  felt  to  be  the  chief  one 
among  them,  being  true,  are  also  material ;  material 
to  be  generally  known,  and  clearly  understood,  and 
well  considered  on  civil  grounds  :  inasmuch  as  they 
invade,  at  a  multitude  of  points,  the  civil  sphere,  and 
seem  even  to  have  no  very  remote  or  shadowy  con- 
nection  with  the  future  peace  and  security  of  Chris- 
tendom. 


m 


VI.  Were  the  Propositions  proper  to  be  set 

FORTH   BY  the   PRESENT  WkITER  ? 


There  remains  yet  before  us  only  the  shortest  and 
least  significant  portion  of  the  inquiry,  namely, 
whether  these  things,  being  true,  and  ijeing  material 
to  be  said,  were  also  proper  to  be  said  by  me.  I  must 
ask  pardon,  if  a  tone  ot  egotism  be  detected  in  this 
necessarily  subordinate  portion  of  my  remarks. 


\m 

m 
'I 

m 


fi 

mm 


»' ■  ?  ■ 


^'1 


Iv'.'i- 

■'ill ; 

fi 

.  m 

.  ■^|il 
■  -if 

111 

hi 

m 


m 

HI 


58 


THE   VATICAN  DECREES 


For  thirty  years,  and  in  a  great  variety  of  circum- 
stances, in  office  and  as  an  independent  Member  of 
Parliament,  in  majorities  and  in  small  minorities,  and 
during  tlie  larger  portion  of  tlie  time*  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  a  great  constituency,  mainly  clerical,  I 
have,  with  others,  labored  to  maintain  ana  extend 
the  civil  rights  of  my  Roman  Catholic  fellow-country- 
men. The  Liberal  party  of  this  country,  wdth  which 
I  have  been  commonly  associated,  has  suffered,  and 
sometimes  suffered  heavily,  in  public  favor  and  in 
influence,  from  the  belief  that  it  was  too  ardent  in  the 
pursuit  of  that  policy;  while  at  the  same  time  it  has 
always  been  in  the  worst  odor  w^ith  the  Court  of 
Rome,  in  consequence  of  its  (I  hope)  unalterable 
attachment  to  Italian  liberty  and  independence.  I 
have  sometimes  been  the  spokesman  of  that  party  in 
recommendations  w4iich  have  tended  to  foster  in  fact 
the  imputation  I  have  mentioned,  though  not  to 
warrant  it  as  matter  of  reason.  But  it  has  existed  in 
fact.  So  that  while  (as  I  think)  general  justice  to 
society  required  that  these  things  which  I  have  now 
set  forth  should  be  wTitten,  special  justice,  as  toward 
the  party  to  which  I  am  lo^^ally  attached,  and  which 
I  may  have  had  a  share  in  thus  placing  at  a  disadvan 
tage  before  our  countrymen,  made  it,  to  say  the  least, 
becoming  that  I  should  not  shrink  from  writing  them. 

In  discharinm?  that  office,  I  have 


)ugh 


per- 


From  1847  to  1865  I  sat  for  the  University  of  Oxford. 


, 


1 


IN  THEIR  BEAPvING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


59 


form  tlie  part  not  of  a  theological  partisan,  but  sim- 
ply of  a  good  citizen ;  of  one  hopeful  that  many  of 
his  Roman  Catholic  friends  and  fellow-countrymen, 
who  are,  to  say  the  least  of  it,  as  good  citizens  as 
himself,  may  perceive  that  the  case  is  not  a  frivolous 
case,  but  one  that  merits  their  attention. 

I  will  next  proceed  to  give  the  reason  why,  up  to 
a  recent  date,  I  have  thought  it  right  in  the  main  to 
leave  to  any  others,  who  might  feel  it,  the  duty  of 
dealing  in  detail  witli  this  question. 

The  great  change,  which  seems  to  me  to  have  been 
brought  about  in  the  position  of  Roman  Catholic 
Christians  as  citizens,  reached  its  consummation,  and 
came  into  full  operation  in  July,  1870,  by  the  pro- 
ceedings or  so-called  decrees  of  the  Vatican  Council. 

Up  to  that  time,  opinion  in  the  Roman  Church  on 
all  matters  involving  civil  liberty,  though  partially 
and  sometimes  widely  intimidated,  was  free  wherever 
it  was  resolute.  During  the  Middle  Ages,  heresy  was 
often  extinguished  in  blood,  but  in  every  Cisalpine 
country  a  principle  of  liberty,  to  a  great  extent,  held 
its  own,  and  national  life  refused  to  be  put  down. 
Nay,  more,  these  precious  and  inestimable  gifts  had 
not  infrequently  for  their  champions  a  local  pre- 
lacy and  clergy.  The  Constitutions  of  Clarendon, 
cursed  from  the  Papal  throne,  were  the  work  of  the 
English  Bishops.  Stephen  Langton,  appointed  di- 
rectly, through  an  extraordinary  stretch  of  power, 


CO 


THE  VATIOAIT  DECREES 


if. 


m 


If 


,!i: 


,;t 


it--' 

I 


by  Innocent  III.,  to  the  See  of  Canterbury,  headed 
the  Barons  of  England  in  extorting  from  the  Papal 
minion  John,  the  worst  and  basest  of  all  our  Sover- 
eigns, that  Magna  Charta  whicb  the  Pope  at  once 
visited  with  his  anathemas.  In  the  reign  of  Henry 
VIII.,  it  was  Tunstal,  Bishop  of  Durham,  who  first 
wrote  against  the  Papal  domination.  Tunstal  was 
followed  by  Gardiner ;  and  even  the  recognition  of 
the  Royal  Headship  was  voted  by  the  clergy,  not 
under  Cranmer,  but  under  his  unsuspected  predeces- 
sor Warham.  Strong  and  domineering  as  was  the 
high  Pa2:)al  party  in  those  centuries,  the  resistance 
was  manful.  Thrice  in  history,  it  seemed  as  if  what 
we  may  call  the  Constitutional  party  in  the  Church 
was  about  to  triumph:  ,first,  at  the  epoch  of  the 
Council  of  Constance;  secondly,  when  the  French 
Episcopate  was  in  conflict  witli  Pope  Innocent  XI. ; 
thirdly,  when  Clement  XIV.  levelled  with  the  dust 
the  deadliest  foes  that  mental  and  moral  liberty  have 
ever  known.  But  from  July,  1870,  this  state  of 
things  has  passed  away,  and  the  death-warrant  of 
that  Constitutional  party  has  been  signed,  and  sealed, 
and  promulgated  in  form. 

Before  that  time  arrived,  although  I  had  used  ex- 
pressions sufficiently  indicative  as  to  the  tendency  of 
things  in  the  great  Latin  Communion,  yet  I  had  for 
very  many  years  felt  it  to  be  the  first  and  para- 
mount  duty  of  the   British  Legislature,  \vhatever 


I 


!3« 
Mi 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


01 


Roniv  might  say  or  do,  to  give  to  Ireland  all  that 
justice  could  demand,  in  regard  to  matters  of  con- 
science and  of  civil  equality,  and  thus  to  set  herself 
nght  in  the  opinion  of  the  civilized  world.  So  far 
from  seeing,  what  some  believed  they  saw,  a  spirit 
of  unworthy  compliance  in  such  a  course,  it  appeared 
to  me  the  only  one  which  suited  either  the  dignity 
or  the  duty  of  my  country.  While  this  debt  re- 
mained unpaid,  both  before  and  after  1870, 1  did  not 
think  it  my  province  to  open  formally  a  line  of  ai'gu- 
ment  on  a  question  of  prospective  rather  than  imme- 
diate moment,  which  might  have  prejudiced  the  mat- 
ter of  duty  lying  nearest  our  hand,  and  morally  in- 
jured Great  Britain  not  less  than  Ireland,  Church, 
men  and  Nonconformists  not  less  than  adherents  of 
the  Papal  Communion,  by  slackening  the  disposition 
to  pay  the  debt  of  justice.  When  Parliament  had 
passed  the  Church  Act  of  1869  and  the  Land  Act  of 
1870,  there  remained  only,  under  the  great  head  of 
Imperial  equity,  one  serious  question  to  be  dealt  with 
— that  of  the  higher  education.  I  consider  that  the 
Liberal  majoiity  in  the  House  of  Commons,  and  the 
Government  to  which  I  had  the  honor  and  satisfac- 
tion to  belong,  formally  tendered  payment  in  full  of 
this  portion  of  the  debt  by  the  Irish  University  Bill 
of  February,  1873.  Some  indeed  think  that  it  was 
overpaid ;  a  question  into  which  this  is  manifestly  not 
the  place  to  enter.     But  the   Roman  Catholic  pre- 


62 


TUE  VATICAN  DECREES 


Pl^' 


I*  ' ',i 

m 


J' 


lacy  of  Ireland  thought  fit  to  procure  the  rejection 
of  that  measure,  by  the  direct  influence  which  they 
exercised  over  a  certain  number  of  Irish  Members  of 
Parliament,  and  by  the  temptation  which  they  thus 
offered — the  bid,  in  effect,  which  (to  use  a  homely 
phrase)  they  made,  to  attract  the  support  of  the  Tory 
Opposition.  Their  efforts  were  crowned  with  a  com- 
plete success.  From  that  time  forward  I  have  felt 
that  the  situation  was  changed,  and  that  important 
matters  would  have  to  be  cleared  by  suitable  explana- 
tions. The  debt  to  Ireland  had  been  paid  :  a  debt  to 
the  country  at  large  had  still  to  be  disposed  of,  and 
this  has  come  to  be  the  duty  of  the  hour.  So  long, 
indeed,  as  I  continued  to  be  Prime  Minister,  I  should 
not  have  considered  a  broad  political  discussion  on 
a  general  question  suitable  to  proceed  from  me ; 
while  neither  I  nor  (I  airf  certain)  my  colleagues 
would  have  been  disposed  to  run  the  risk  oi"  stirring 
popular  passions  by  a  vulgar  and  unexplained  ap- 
peal. But  every  difficulty,  arising  from  the  neces- 
sary limitations  of  an  official  position,  has  now  been 
removed. 


i^ 


VII.     On  the  Home  Policy  of  the  Future. 

I  could  not,  however,  conclude  these  observations 
without  anticipating  and  answering  an  inquiry  they 
suggest.     "  Are  they,  then,"  it  w411  be  asked,  "  a 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


63 


recantation  and  a  regret ;  and  what  are  tliey  meant 
to  recommend  as  tlie  policy  of  tlie  future  ? "  My 
reply  shall  "be  succinct  and  pLain.  Cf  "svhat  the 
Liberal  party  has  accomplished,  by  word  or  deed,  in 
establishing  the  full  civil  equality  of  Koman  Catho- 
lics, I  regret  nothing,  and  I  recant  nothing. 

It  is  certainly  a  political  misfortune  that,  during 
the  last  thirty  years,  a  Church  so  tainted  in  its  views 
of  civil  obedience,  and  so  unduly  capable  of  changing 
its  front  and  language  after  Emancipation  from  what 
it  had  been  before,  like  an  actor  who  has  to  perform 
several  characters  in  one  piece,  should  have  acquired 
an  extension  of  its  hold  upon  the  highest  classes  of 
this  country.  The  conquests  have  been  chiefly,  as 
might  have  been  expected,  among  women ;  but  the 
number  of  male  converts,  or  captives  (as  I  might 
prefer  to  call  them),  has  not  been  inconsiderable. 
There  is  no  doubt,  that  every  one  of  these  secessions 
is  in  the  nature  of  a  considerable  moral  and  social 
severance.  The  breadth  of  this  gap  varies,  according 
to  varieties  of  individual  character.  But  it  is  too 
commonly  a  wide  one.  Too  commonly,  the  spirit  of 
the  neophyte  is  expressed  by  the  words  which  have 
become  notorious :  "  a  Catholic  first,  an  Englishman 
afterward."  Words  which  properly  convey  no  more 
than  a  truism ;  for  every  Christian  must  seek  to  place 
his  religion  even  before  his  country  in  his  inner  heart. 
But  very  far  from  a  truism  in  the  sense  in  which  we 


C-i 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


'■VI' 


I, 


Hi'  ■ 


if*  4 
1'  •' 

m  l 
*■  -' 


have  been  led  to  construe  tlieni.  'We  take  tlieni  t-) 
mean  that  tlie  "  convert "  intends,  in  case  of  any  con- 
flict between  the  Queen  and  the  PopCj  to  foHow  th(» 
Pope,  and  let  the  Queen  shift  for  herself;  which,  haj;- 
pily,  she  can  well  do. 

Usually,  in  this  country,  a  movement  in  the  high- 
est class  would  raise  a  presumption  of  a  similar  move- 
ment in  the  mass.  It  is  not  so  here.  Humors  have 
gone  about  that  the  proportion  of  members  of  the 
Papal  Church  to  the  population  haS  increased,  espe- 
cially in  England.  But  these  rumors  would  seem  to 
be  confuted  by  authentic  figures.  The  Roman  Cath- 
olic Marriages,  which  supply  a  competent  test,  and 
which  were  4*89  per  cent,  of  the  whole  in  1854,  and 
4*62  per  cent,  in  1859,  were  4*09  per  cent,  in  18G9, 
and  4*02  per  cent,  in  1871. 

There  is  something  at  the  least  al)normal  in  such 
a  partial  growth,  taking  eifect  as  it  does  among  the 
wealthy  and  noble,  while  the  people  cannot  be 
charmed,  by  any  incantation,  into  the  Koman  camp. 
The  original  Gospel  was  suj^posed  to  be  meant  espe- 
cially for  the  poor ;  but  the  gospel  of  the  nineteenth 
century  from  Rome  courts  another  and  less  modest 
destination.  If  the  Pope  does  not  control  more  souls 
among  us,  he  certainly  controls  more  acres. 

The  severance,  however,  of  a  certain  number  of 
lords  of  the  soil  from  those  who  till  it,  can  be  borne. 
And  so  I  trust  will  in  like  manner  be  endured  the 


IN   TIIEIll   BEAKIXG   ON  CIVIL  AIXKOIANCE. 


G'o 


new  aii<l  very  real  "  aggresHion  "  of  the  prineiples  pro- 
ikiiilgateil  l)y  Papal  autliority,  whether  tliey  are  or 
are  not  loyally  disclaimed.  In  this  matter,  each  man 
is  his  own  judge  and  his  own  guide  :  I  can  apeak  for 
myself.  I  am  no  longer  able  to  say,  as  I  would  have 
said  before  1870,  "There  isnothins:  in  the  necessarv 
])elief  of  the  Roman  Catholic  whicli  can  appear  to 
impeach  his  full  civil  title ;  for,  whatsoever  be  the 
follies  of  ecclesiastical  ])()wer  in  his  Church,  his 
Church  itself  has  not  required  of  him,  with  binding 
authority,  to  assent  tt)  any  principles  inconsistent 
with  his  civil  duty."  Tliat  ground  is  n(\w,  for  the 
present  at  least,  cut  from  under  my  feet.  What 
then  is  to  be  our  course  of  policy  hereafter  ?  First 
let  me  say  that,  as  regards  the  great  Imperial  set 
tlement,  achieved  by  slow  degrees,  which  has  admit 
ted  men  of  all  creeds  subsisting  among  us  to  Par- 
liament, that  I  conceive  to  be  so  determined  be- 
yond all  doubt  or  question,  as  to  have  become  one  of 
the  deep  foundation-stones  of  the  existing  Constitu- 
tion. But  inasmuch  as,  short  of  this  great  charter  of 
public  liberty,  and  independently  of  all  that  has  been 
done,  there  are  pending  matters  of  comparatively 
minor  moment  whicli  have  been,  or  may  be,  subjects 
of  discussion,  not  without  interest  attaching  to  them, 
I  can  suppose  a  question  to  arise  in  the  minds  of 
some.     My  own  views  and  intentions  in  the  future 

are  of  the  smallest  significance.     But,  if  the  ai'gu- 
5 


■•ht 


'^r 


i] 


OG 


THE  VATICAN  DECREES 


■I  I 

h 

:  it:.  ' 


I  *i: 


iVn 


1»S  J 


ineuts  I  have  liere  offered  make  it  my  duty  to  declare 
them,  I  say  at  once  the  future  will  be  exactly  as  the 
past :  in  the  little  that  depends  on  me,  I  siiall  be 
guided  hereafter,  as  heretofore,  by  the  rule  of  7nain- 
taining  equal  civil  rights  irrespectively  of  religions 
differences ;  and  shall  resist  all  attempts  to  exclude 
the  membe\'s  of  the  Roman  Church  from  the  benefit 
of  that  rule.  Indeed  I  may  say  that  I  have  already 
given  conclusive  indications  of  this  view,  by  sap- 
porting  in  Parliament,  as  a  Minister,  since  1870,  the 
repeal  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Titles  Act,  for  what  I 
think  ample  reasons,  ISot  only  because  the  time 
has  not  yet  come  when  we  can  assume  the  conse- 
quences of  the  revolutionary  measureii^  of  1870  to 
have  been  thoroughly  weighed  and  digested  by  all 
capable  men  in  the  Eoman  Communion.  Not  only 
because  so  great  a  numerical  proportion  are,  as  I  have 
before  observed,  necessarily  incapable  of  mastering, 
and  forming  their  personal  judgm^^nt  upon^  the  case. 
Quite  irrespectively  even  of  thess  considerations,  I 
^old  that  our  onward  even  course  should  not  be 
changed  by  follies,  the  consequences  of  which,  if  tlie 
w(  st  come  to  the  worst,  this  country  will  have  alike 
ttie  power  and,  in  case  of  need,  the  will  to  control. 
The  State  \\411, 1  trust,  be  ever  careful  to  leave  the  do- 
main of  religious  conscience  free,  and  yet  to  keep  it  to 
its  own  domain;  .ind  to  allow  neither  private  caprice 
nor,  above  all,  foreign  arrogance  to  dictate  to  it  in  the 


•  f 


IN  THEIR  BEARING  ON  CIVIL  ALLEGIANCE. 


G7 


discLarg'^.  of  its  proper  office.  "  Eugland  expects 
every  man  to  do  his  duty ; "  and  none  can  be  so  well 
prepared  under  all  circumstances  to  exact  its  per- 
formance as  tliat  Liberal  party  wliicli  lias  done  the 
work  of  lustice  alike  for  Nonconformists  and  for  Papal 
dissidents,  and  whose  members  have  so  often,  for  the 
sake  of  that  ^vork,  hazarded  their  credit  with  the 
markedly  Protestant  constituencies  of  the  country. 
Stronrr  the  State  of  the  United  Kingdom  has  always 
been  in  material  strength  ;  and  its  moral  panoply  is 
now,  we  may  hope,  pretty  complete. 

It  is  not  then  for  the  dignity  of  the  Crown  and 

people  of  the  United  Kingdom  to  be  diverted  from 

a   path   which  they  have  deliberately  chosen,  and 

which  it  does  not  rest  with  all  the  myrmidons  of 

the  Apostolic  Chamber  either  openly  to  obstruct,  or 

secretly  to  undermine.  It  is  rightfully  to  be  expected, 

it  's  greatly  to  be  desired,  that  the  Roman  Catholics 

of  this  country  should  do  in  the  Nhieteenth  century 

what  their  forefathers  of  England,  except  a  handful 

of  emissaries,  did  in  the  Sixteenth,  when  they  were 

marshalled  in  resistance  to  the  x\rmada,  and  in  the 

Seventeenth  when,  in    despite  of  the  Papal  Chair, 

they  sat  in  the  House  of  Lords  under  the  Oath  of 

Alleo>iance.     That  which  we  are  entitled  to  desire, 

we  are  entitled  also  to  expect :  indeed,  to  say  we 

did  not  expect  it,  would,  in  my  judgment,  be  the 

tiue  way  of  conveying  an   "  insult "  to  those  con 


;l 


0g  THE  VATICAN  DECREFO,  ETC. 

cernecl.     In  this  expectation  we  may  he  partially 
disappointed.      Shonld  those   to  whom   I   appeal, 
thus  imhappily  come  to  bear  witness  in  their  own 
persons  to  the  decay  of  sound,  manly,  true  lite  m 
their  Church,  it  will  be  their  loss  more  than  ours. 
The  inhabitants  of  these  islands,  as  a  whole,   are 
stable,  though  sometimes  credulous  and  excitable ; 
resolute,  though  sometimes  boastful :  and  a  strong- 
headed  and  sound-hearted  race  will  not  be  hindered, 
either  by  latent  or  by  avowed  dissents,  due  to  the 
foreign  influence  of  a  caste,  from  the  accomplishment 
of  its  mission  in  the  world. 


If,  • ' 


ll 


]»•• ) 


I 

■•{•' 
ill'. 
j '  ' 
{■. 

I: 


,1.. 

,nv- 


APPENDICES. 


APPENDIX  A. 


The  numbers  here  given  correspond  with  those  of  the  Eighteen  Proposi- 
tions given  in  the  text,  where  it  would  have  heen  less  convenient  to  cite 
the  originals. 

1,  2,  3.  "Ex  qua  omnino  folsa  socialis  regiminis  ided 
hand  timent  erroneam  illam  fovere  opinionera,  Catholicse 
Ecclesise,  animarumque  sduti  raaxirae  exitialem,  arec.  mem. 
Gregorio  XIV.  prsedccessore  Nostro  deliramentum  appella- 
tam  (eadem  Encycl.  mirari),  niminira,  libertatem  conscien- 
tiee  et  cultuum  esse  proprium  ciijuscunqueliominisjus,  quod 
lege  proclamari,  et  asseri  debet  in  omni  recte  constitute  so- 
cietatc,  et  jus  civibus  inessc  ad  omnimodam  libertatem  nulla 
vel  ecelesiastica,  vel  civili  auctoritate  coarctandam,  quo  sues 
conceptus  quoscumque  sive  voce  sivc  typis,  sive  alia  ratione 
palam  publiceque  manifestare  ac  deckrare  valeant."— ^wc?/- 

clical  Letter. 

4.  "  Atque  silentio  pm^terire  non  possumus  eormn  auda- 
ciara,  qui  sanam  non  sustinentes  doctrinam  '  illis  Apostolicse 
Sedis  judiciis,  ct  dccretis,  quorum  objectum  ad  bonum  gene- 
rale  Ecclcsite,  ejusdemque  jura,  ac  disciplinam  spectare  dccla- 
ratur,  dummodo  fidei  morumquc  dogmata  non  attingat,  posse 
assensum  et  obcdientiam  detrectari  absque  peccato,  et  absque 
ulUi  Catholicee  professionis  jactura.'  '''—Ibid. 


X-,-' 


w 


fli 

W- 

1 

1'^! 

1 

■  1 1 

1 

--I"*'    ^ 


^C> 


Wl 


M 


K\, 


An  i 

ID. 


YO 


APrFN^DICES. 


5.  "  Ecclesia  non  est  vera  perfectaqiie  societas  plane  li- 
bera, nee  pollet  suis  propriis  et  constantibus  juribus  sibi  a 
divino  suo  Fundatore  collatis,  sed  civilis  potestatis  est  dcfi- 
nireqnse  sint  Ecclesice  jura,  ac  limites,  intra  quos  eademjura 
exercere  queat." — Sijlldbus  v. 

6.  "  Roman i  Pontifices  et  Concilia  oecumenica  a  limiti- 
bus  sure  potestatis  recesserunt,  jura  Principum  usurparunt, 
atque  etiara  in  rebus  fidei  et  morum  definiendis  errarunt." — • 
Ihid.  xxiii.  • 

7.  "  Ecolesia  vis  inferendas  potestatem  non  liabet,  neque 
potestatem  uilam  temporalcm  directam  vel  indirectam." — 
Ih'id.  xxiv. 

8.  "  Praeter  potestatem  episcopatui  inhaerentem,  alia  est 
attributa  temporalis  potestas  a  civili  imperio  vel  exprcsse  vel 
tacite  concessa,  revocanda  propterca,  cum  libuerit,  a  civili 
imperio." — Ihid.  xxv. 

9.  "  Ecclesise  et  personarum  ecclesiasticarum  immunitas 
a  jure  civili  ortum  babuit." — Ihid.  xxx. 

10.  "In  conflictu  legum  utriusque  potestatis,  j as  civile 
prsevalet." — Ihid.  xlii. 

11.  "Catliolicis  viris'probL  i  potest  ea  juventutis  insti- 
tuendae  ratio,  quos  sit  a  Catholica  fide  et  ab  Ecclesice  potestate 
sejuncta,  quoeque  rerum  dumtaxat,  naturalium  scientiam  ac 
terrense  socialis  vita3  fines  tantummodo  vel  saltern  priniarium 
spcctet," — Ihid.  xlviii. 

12.  "  Philosopliiearnin  rerum  moruraque  scientia,  item- 
que  civiles  leges  possunt  et  debcnt  a  divina  et  ecclesiasticsi 
auctoritate  declinare." — Ihid.  Ivii. 

13.  "Matrimonii  sacramentum  non  est  nisi  contractui 
accessorium  ab  eoque  separabile,  ijosumque  sacramentum  in 
uuii  tantum  nuptiali  benedictione  situm  est." — Ihid.  Ixvi. 

"  Vi  contractus  mere  civilis  potest  inter  Christianos  con- 
stare  A'eri  nominis  matrimonium ;  falsumque  est,  aut  contrac- 
tum  matrimonii  inter  Christianos  semper  esse  sacramentum, 
aut  nullum  esse  contractum,  si  sacramentum  excludatur." — 
Ihid.  Ixxiii. 


APPENDICES. 


Tl 


14.  "  Do  temporalis  regni  cum  spiritual!  compatibilitatc 
disputant  inter  se  Christians  et  Catholicse  EcclesiiG  filii." — 
Syllabus  Ixxv. 

15.  "Abrogatio  civilis  imperii,  quo  Apostolica  Sedes 
potitur,  ad  Ecclesire  libertatem  felicitatemque  vel  maximc 
oonduceret." — Ihid.  Ixxvi. 

16.  "  iEtate  liae  nostra  non  ampli us  expedit  religionem 
Catholicam  liaberi  tanquam  unicam  status  religionem,  casteris 
quibuseumque  cultibus  exclusis." — lUd.  Ixxvii. 

17.  "  Ilinc  laudabiliter  in  quibusdam  Catliolici  nomini-s 
regionibus  lege  cautum  est,  ut  liominibus  illuc  immigranti- 
bus  liceat  publicum  proprii  cujusque  cultus  exercitium  lia- 
bere." — Ihid.  Ixxviii. 

18.  "  Komanus  Pontifex  potest  ac  debet  cum  progrcssu, 
cum  liberalism©  et  cum  recenti  civilitate  sese  re.  onciliare  et 
componere." — Ihid,  Ixxx. 


APPENDIX  B. 

I  liave  contented  myself  with  a  minimum  of  citation  from 
the  documents  of  the  period  before  Emancipation.  Their 
full  effect  can  only  be  gathered  by  such  as  are  acquainted 
with,  or  will  take  the  trouble  to  refer  largely  to,  the  originals. 
It  is  worth  while,  however,  to  cite  the  following  passage 
from  Bishop  Doyle,  as  it  may  convey,  tlirough  the  indigna- 
tion it  expresses,  an  idea  of  the  amplitude  of  the  assurances 
which  had  been  (as  I  believe,  most  honestly  and  sincerely) 
given  : 

"  There  is  no  justice,  my  Lord,  in  thus  condemning  us. 
Such  conduct  on  the  part  of  our  opponents  creates  in  our 
bosoms  a  sense  of  wrong  being  done  to  us ;  it  exhausts  oui 
patience,  it  provokes  our  indignation,  and  prevents  us  from 
reiterating  our  cfibrts  to  obtain  a  more  impartial  hearing. 
We  are  tempted,  in  such  cases  as  these,  to  attribute  unfair 


APPENDICES. 


I 


motives  to  those  who  differ  from  us,  as  we  cannot  conceive 
how  men  gifted  with  intelligence  can  fail  to  discover  truths 
so  plainly  demonstrated  as, 

"  That  our  faith  or  our  allegiance  is  not  regulated  by 
any  such  doctrines  as  those  imputed  to  us  ; 

"  That  our  duties  to  the  Government  of  our  country  are 
not  influenced  nor  affected  by  any  Bulls  or  practices  of 
Popes ; 

"  That  these  duties  are  to  be  learned  by  us,  as  by  every 
other  class  of  His  Majesty's  subjects,  from  the  Gospel,  from 
the  reason  given  to  us  by  God,  from  that  love  of  country 
which  ]N'ature  has  implanted  in  our  hearts,  and  from  those 
constitutional  maxims,  which  are  as  well  understood,  and  as 
highly  appreciated,  by  Catholics  of  the  present  day,  as  by 
their  ancestors,  who  founded  them  with  Alfred,  or  secured 
them  at  Hunnymede.'' — Doyle's  '  Essay  on  the  CatJioliG 
Claims,'  London,  1826,  p.  38. 

The  same  general  tone,  as  in  1826,  was  maintained  in  the 
answers  of  the  witnesses  from  Maynooth  College  before  the 
Commission  of  1855.  See,  for  example,  pp.  132,  161-4, 
272-3,  275,  361,  370-^,  381-2,  394-6,  405.  The  Commis- 
sion reported  (p.  64),  "We  see  no  reason  to  believe  that 
there  has  been  any  disloyalty  in  the  teaching  of  the  college, 
or  any  disposition  to  impair  the  obligations  of  an  unreserved 
allegiance  to  your  Majesty." 


APPEi^DIX  C. 


jii. 


% 


Compare  the  recent  and  ominous  forecasting  of  the  future 
European  policy  of  the  British  Crown,  in  an  Article  from  a 
Romish  Periodical  for  the  current  month,  which  has  direct 
relation  to  these  matters,  and  which  hns  every  appearance 
of  proceeding  from  authority : 

"  Surely  in  any  European  complication,  such  as  may  any 


APPENDICES. 


73 


day  arise,  nay,  such  as  must  ere  long  arise,  from  the  natural 
gravitation  of  the  forces,  which  are  for  the  moment  kept  in 
check  and  truce  by  the  necessity  of  preparation  for  their 
inevitable  collision,  it  may  very  well  be  that  the  future 
prosperity  of  England  may  be  staked  in  the  struggle,  and 
that  the  side  which  she  may  take  may  be  determined,  not 
either  by  justice  or  interest,  but  &y  ajmssionate  resolve  to 
keep  iqy  the  Italian  Ungdom  at  any  hazard:'— "YIxg  '  Month' 
for  ISovembcr,  1874:    'Mr.  Gladstone's   Durham  Letter,' 

p.  20:.. 

This  is  a  remarkable  disclosure.  With  whoin  could 
England  be  brought  into  conflict  by  any  disposition  she 
might  feel  to  keep  up  the  Italian  kingdom  ?  Considered  as 
States,  both  Austria  and  France  are  in  complete  harmony 
with  Italy.  But  it  is  plain  that  Italy  has  some  enemy ;  and 
the  writers  of  the  'Month'  appear  to  know  who  it  is. 


APPENDIX    D. 


Notice  has  been  taken,  both  in  this  country  and  abroad, 
of  the  apparent  inertness  of  public  men,  and  of  at  least  one 
British  Administration,  with  respect  to  the  subject  of  these 
pages.  See  Friedberg, '  Griinzen  zwischen  Staat  und Kirche,' 
Abtheilung  ili.  pp.  755-6;  and  the  Preface  to  the  Fifth 
Volume  of  Mr.  Greenwood's  elaborate,  able,  and  judicial 
work,  entitled  '  Cathedra  Petri,'  p.  iv. : 

"  If  there  be  any  chance  of  such  a  revival,  it  would  be- 
come our  political  leaders  to  look  more  closely  into  the  pecu- 
liarities of  a  system,  which  denies  the  right  of  the  subject 
to  freedom  of  thought  and  action  upon  matters  mosi  mate- 
rial to  his  civil  and  religious  welfare.  There  is  no  mode  of 
ascertaining  the  spirit  and  tendency  of  great  institutions  but 
in  a  careful  study  of  their  history.     The  writer  is  profoundly 


K     'l 


if 


t.      I 


\r 


u 


APPENDICES. 


impressed  with  the  conviction  that  our  political  instructors 
have  wholly  neglected  this  important  duty:  or,  which  is 
perhaps  worse,  left  it  in  the  hands  of  a  class  of  persons 
whose  zeal  has  outrun  their  discretion,  and  who  have  sought 
rather  to  engage  the  prejudices  than  the  judgment  of  their 
hearers  in  the  cause  they  have,  no  doubt  sincerely,  at  heart. 


.t!f,    . 


EEPLY  OF  ARCHBISHOP  MANNING. 


To  the  Editor  of  tfts  Times  : 

SiRj__The  gravity  of  the  subject  on  which  I  address  yon, 
aiFecting  as  it  must  every  Catholic  in  the  British  Empire, 
will,  I  hope,  obtain  from  the  courtesy  that  you  have  always 
shown  to  me  the  publication  of  this  letter. 

This  morning  I  received  a  copy  of  the  pamphlet  enti- 
tled "  The  Vatican  Decrees  in  their  bearing  on  Civil  Allegi- 
ance." I  find  in  it  a  direct  appeal  to  myself,  both  for  the 
office  I  hold  and  for  the  writings  I  have  published.  I  gladly 
acknowledge  the  duty  that  lies  upon  me  for  both  those  rea- 
sons. I  am  bound  by  the  office  I  bear  not  to  suffer  a  day 
to  pass  wi-iiout  repelling  from  the  Catholics  of  this  country 
the  lightest  imputation  upon  their  loyalty;  and,  for  my 
teaching,  I  am  ready  to  show  that  the  principles  I  have  ever 
taught  are  beyond  impeachment  upon  that  score. 

It  is  true,  indeed,  that,  in  page  57  of  the  pamphlet,  Mr. 
Gladstone  expresses  his  belief  "  that  many  of  his  Eoman 
Catholic  friends  and  fellow-countrymen "  arc,  "  to  say  the 
least  of  it,  as  good  citizens  as  himself."  But  as  the  whole 
pamphlet  is  an  elaborate  argument  to  prove  that  the  teach- 


K 


?/'''■■■; 


1  '■}  J 


76 


REPLY  OF  ARCIII3ISII0P  MANNING. 


ing  of  the  Vatican  Council  renders  it  impossible  for  tlicm  to 
be  80,  I  cannot  accept  this  graceful  acluiowledgment,  which 
implies  that  they  are  good  citizens  because  they  arc  at  vari- 
ance with  the  Catholic  Church. 

I  should  be  wanting  in  duty  to  the  Catholics  of  this 
country  and  to  myself  if  I  did  not  give  a  prompt  contradic- 
tion to  this  statement,  and  if  I  did  not  with  equal  prompt- 
ness affirm  that  the  loyalty  of  our  civil  allegiance  is  not  in 
spite  of  the  teaching  of  the  Catholic  Church,  but  because 
of  it. 

The  sum  of  the  argument  in  the  pamphlet  just  publislied 
to  the  world  is  this :  That  by  the  Vatican  Decrees  such  a 
change  has  been  made  in  the  relations  of  Catholics  to  the 
civil  power  of  States  that  it  is  no  longer  possible  for  tlienj 
to  render  the  same  undivided  civil  allegiance  as  it  was  pos- 
sible for  Catholics  to  render  before  the  promulgation  of 
those  Decrees. 

In  answer  to  this,  it  is  for  the  present  sufficient  to 
affirm :  ' 

1.  That  the  Vatican  Decrees  have  in  no  jot  or  tittle 
changed  either  the  obligations  or  the  conditions  of  civil  al- 
legiance. 

2.  That  the  civil  allegiance  of  Catholics  is  as  undivided 
as  that  of  all  Christians  and  of  all  men  who  recognize  a 

divine  or  natural  moral  law. 

3.  That  the  civil  allegiance  of  no  man  is  unlimited,  and 

therefore  the  civil  allegiance  of  all  men  who  believe  in  God, 
or  are  governed  by  conscience,  is  in  that  sense  divided. 

In  this  sense,  and  in  no  other,  can  it  be  said  with  truth 
that  the  civil  allegiance  of  Catholics  is  divided.  The  civil 
allegiance  of  every  Christian  man  in  England  is  limited  by 


iti: 


REPLY  OF  ARCHBISHOP  MANNING. 


17 


conscience  and  tlie  law  of  God,  and  tlie  civil  allegiance  of 
Catholics  is  limited  neither  less  nor  move. 

The  public  peace  of  the  British  Empire  has  been  con- 
solidated in  the  last  half  century  by  the  elimination  of 
religious  conflicts  and  inequalities  from  our  laws.     The  Em- 
pirc^of  0<-rmany  might  have  been  equally  peac.ful  and  stable 
if  its  statesmen  had  not  been  tempted  in  an  evil  hour  to  ralce 
up  the  old  fires  of  religious  disuiuon.     The  hand  of  one  man 
more  than  any  other  threw  this  torch  of  discord  into  the 
German  Empire.     The  history  of  Germany  will  record  the 
name  of  Doctor  Ignatius  von  Dollingcr  as  the  author  of  this 
national  evil.    I  lament  not  only  to  read  the  name,  but  to 
trace  the  arguments  of  Dr.  von  Dollinger  in  the  pamphlet 
before  me.    May  God  preserve  these  kingdoms  from  the 
public  and  private  calamities  Avhich  arc  visibly  impending 
over  Germany  1     The  author  of  the  pamphlet,  in  his  first 
line,  assures  us  that  his  "purpose  is  not  polemical,  but  pa- 
cific."    I  am  sorry  that  so  good  an  intention  should  have 
so  widely  erred  in  the  selection  of  the  means. 

But  my  purpose  is  neither  to  criticise  nor  to  controvert. 
My  desire  and  my  duty  as  an  Englishman,  as  a  Catholic, 
and  as  a  pastor,  is  to  claim  for  my  flock  and  for  myself  a 
civil  allegiance  as  pure,  as  true,  and  as  loyal  as  is  rendered 
by  the  distinguished  author  of  the  pamphlet  or  by  any  sub- 
ject of  the  British  Empire. 

I  remain.  Sir,  your  faithful  servant, 
HENKY  EDWAED, 

Archbishop  of  Westminster. 

November  1. 


I' 


,1 


w 


r    V 


REPLY  OF  LOED  ACTON. 


I?' 


7b  </t^  ^Ji^o?'  of  tlie  Times : 

Sib -May  I  ask  you  to  publisli  tlic  enclosed  preliminary 
reply  to  Mr.  Gladstone's  public  Expostulation  ? 

Your  obedient  servant, 

ACTON. 


\ 


I 


i> 


ATHENiEUM,  November  8. 
Dear    Mr.  Gladstone,-!  Avill    not    anticipate   by   a 
sin-le  word  the  course  wbicb  tbose  wlio  are  immediately 
concerned  may  adopt  in  answer  to  your  challenge.    But 
there  are  points  which  I  think  you  have  overlooked,  and 
which  maybe  raised  most  fitly  by  those  who  are  least  respon- 
sible     The  question  of  policy  and  opportuneness  I  leave 
for  others  to  discuss  with  you.     Speaking  in  the  open  day- 
licrht,  from  my  own  point  of  view,  as  a  Roman  Cathohc  born 
in  the  nineteenth  century,  I  cannot  object  that  focts  which 
are  of  a  nature  to  influence  the  belief  of  men  should  be 
brouo-ht  completely  to  their  knowledge.     Concealment  is 
unworthy  of  those  things  which  are  Divine  and  holy  in  re- 


iS;  ; 


■Uv 


IlEPLY  OF  LORD  ACTON". 


70 


t' 


Hrrion,  and  in  tlio^e  things  wliicli  arc  liunian  mid  profane 
publicity  lias  value  as  a  check. 

I  understand  your  argument  to  bo  substantially  as  fol- 
lows: The  Catholics  obtained  Emancipation  by  declaring 
that  they  were  in  every  sen-  >  of  the  term  loyal  and  laithfui 
subjects  of  the  realm,  and  that  Papal  Infallibility  was  not  a 
dogma  of  their  Church.  Later  events  have  lalsilied  one 
declaration,  have  disturbed  the  stability  of  the  other ;  and 
the  problem  therefore  arises  whether  the  authority  which 
has  annulled  the  profession  of  fiiith  made  by  the  Catholics  • 
.would  not  be  competent  to  change  their  conceptions  of  po- 
litical duty. 

This  is  a  question  that  may  be  i\iirly  asked,  and  it  was 
long  since  made  ftimiliar  to  tbe  Catholics  by  the  language  of 
their  own  Bishops.     One  of  them  has  put  it  in  the  follow- 
ing terms  :    "  How  shall  we  persuade  the  Protestants  that 
wl  are  not  acting  in  defiance  of  honor  and  good  faith,  if, 
having  declared  that  Infallibility  was  not  an  article  of  our 
faith  while  we  were  contending  for  our  rights,  we  should, 
now  that  we  have  got  what  we  wanted,  withdraw  from  our 
public  declaration  and  affirm  the  contrary  % "  The  case  is, 
2yrima  facie,  a  strong  one,  and  it  would  be  still  more 
serious 'if  the  whole   structure  of  our  liberties   and  our 
toleration  was  founded  on  the  declarations  given   by  the 
English  and  Irish  Bishops  some  years  before  the  Relief  Act. 
Those  documents,  interesting  and  significant  as  they  are, 
are  unknown  to  the  Conrtitution.    What  is  known,  and 
what  was  for  a  generation  part  of  the  law  of  the  country,  is 
something  more  solemn  and  substantial  than  a  series   of 
miproved  assertions-namely,  the  oath  in  which  the  political 
essence  of  those  declarations  was  concentrated.     That  was 


80 


KEPLY   OF  LORD  ACTON. 


I 


u 


Jl: 


t*! 


$ 


the  security  wliicli  Parliament  required ;  tliat  was  the  pledge 
by  which  we  were  bound ;  and  it  binds  us  no  more.  The 
Legislature,  judging  that  what  was  sufficient  for  Eepub 
licans  was  sufficient  for  Catholics,  abolished  the  oath,  foi 
the  best  reasons,  some  time  before  the  disestablishment  of 
the  Irish  Church.  If  there  is  no  longer  a  special  bond  for 
the  loyalty  of  Catholics,  the  fact  is  due  to  the  deliberate 
judgment  of  the  House  of  Commons.  After  having  surren- 
dered the  only  real  constitutional  securit  ,  there  seems 
scarcely  reason  to  lament  the  depreciation  of  a  less  substan- 
tial guarantee,  which  was  very  indirectly  connected  with 
the  action  of  Parliament,  and  was  virtually  superseded  by 
the  oath. 

The  doctrines  against  which  you  are  contending  did 
not  begin  with  the  Vatican  Council.  At  the  time  when 
the  Catholic  oath  was  '•epealed  the  Pope  had  the  same  right 
and  power  to  excommunicate  those  who  denied  his  author- 
ity to  depose  princes  that  he  possesses  now.  The  writers 
most  esteemed  at  Eome  held  that  doctrine  as  an  article  of 
foith  ;  a,  modern  Pontiff  had  affirmed  that  it  cannot  be 
abandoned  ■without  taint  of  heresv,  and  that  those  who 
questioned  and  restricted  his  authority  in  temporal  matters 
^^ere  worse  than  those  who  rejected  it  in  spirituals,  and 
accordingly  men  suffered  death  for  this  cause  as  others  did 
for  ^blasphemy  and  Atheism.  The  recent  decrees  have 
r.either  increased  the  penalty  nor  made  it  more  easy  to 
inflict. 

That  is  the  true  j.nswcr  to  your  appeal.  Your  indict- 
ment would  be  more  just  if  it  was  more  complete.  If  you 
pursue  the  inquiry  fnicher,  you  will  find  graver  matter  than 
all  you  have  enumerated,  establis^ied  by  higher  and  more 


h 


REPLY  OF  LORD  ACTON. 


81 


' 


Ancient  authority  than  a  meeting  of  bishops  half-a-century 
ago.  And  then  I  think  you  will  admit  that  your  Catholic 
countrymen  cannot  fairly  be  called  on  to  account  for  every 
particle  of  a  system  which  has  neA-er  come  before  them  in 
its  integrity,  or  for  opinions  whose  existence  among  divines 
they  would  be  exceedingly  reluctant  to  believe. 

I  will  explain  my  meaning  by  an  example :  A  Pope 
who  lived  in  Catholic  times,  and  who  is  famous  in  history 
as  the  author  of  the  first  Crusade,  decided  that  it  is  no  mur- 
der to  kill  excommunicated  persons.  This  rule  was  incorpo- 
rated in  the  Canon  Law.  In  the  revision  of  the  Code,  which 
took  place  in  luj  I61I1  century,  and  produced  a  whole  vol- 
ume of  corrections,  the  passage  WivS  allowed  to  stand.  It 
appears  in  every  reprint  of  the  '  Corpus  Juris.'  It  has  been 
for  700  years  and  continues  to  be  part  of  the  ecclesiastical 
law.  Far  from  having  been  a  dead  letter,  it  obtained  a 
new  application  in  the  days  of  the  Inquisition,  and  one,  of 
the  later  Popes  has  declared  that  the  murder  of  a  Protes- 
tant is  so  ^ood  a  deed  that  it  atones,  and  more  than  atones, 
for  the  murder  of  a  Catholic.  Again,  the  greatest  legislator 
of  the  Mediaeval  Chu7*cb  laid  down  this  proposition,  that 
allegiance  must  not  be  kept  with  heretical  Princes — cum  ei 
qid  Deo  fidem  non  servat  fides  servanda  non  sit.  This  prin- 
ciple was  ad*  pted  by  a  celebrated  Council,  and  is  confirmed 
by  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  the  oracle  of  the  schools.  The  Syl- 
labus which  you  cite  hac  assuredly  not  acquired  greater 
authority  in  the  Church  than  the  Canon  Law  and  the  Lateran 
Decrees,  than  Innocent  the  Third  and  St.  Thomas.  Yet 
these  things  were  as  well  known  when  the  oath  was  repealed 
as  they  are  now.  But  it  was  felt  that,  whatever  might  be 
the  letter  of  Canons  and  the  spirit  of  the  Ecclesiastical 
6 


S2 


EEPLY  OF  LORD  ACTON. 


Laws,  tlie  Catholic  people  of  tin's  country  might  be  honor- 
ably trusted. 

But  I  will  pass  from  the  letter  to  the  spirit  which  is 
moving  men  at  the  p;*esent  day.  It  belongs  peculiarly  to 
the  character  of  a  genuine  Ultramontane  not  only  to  guide 
his  life  by  the  example  of  canonized  Saints,  but  to  receive 
with  reverence  and  submission  the  words  of  Popes.  Now, 
Pius  Y.,  the  only  Pope  who  has  been  proclaimed  a  Saint  for 
many  centuries,  having  deprived  Elizabeth,  commissioned 
an  assassin  to  take  her  life  ;  and  his  next  successor,  on  learn- 
ing that  the  Protestants  were  being  massacred  in  France, 
pronounced  the  actic  ^  bvious  and  holy,  but  com.parative- 
ly  barren  of  results  i*.  u  implored  the  King  during  two 
months,  by  his  Kunc^L-  and  his  Legate,  to  carry  the  work 
on  to  the  bitter  end  until  every  Huguenot  had  recanted  or 
perished.  It  is  hard  to  believe  that  these  things  can  excite 
in  the  bosom  of  the  most  fervent  Ultramontane  that  sort  of 
admiration  or  assent  that  displays  itself  in  action.  If  they 
do  not,  then  it  cannot  be  truly  said  that  Catholics  forfeit 
their  moral  freedom,  or  place  their  duty  at  the  mercy  of 
another. 

There  is  waste  of  power  by  friction  even  in  well-con- 
structed machines,  and  no  machinery  can  enforce  that  degree 
of  unity  and  harmony  which  you  apprehend.  Little  fellow- 
ship or  confidence  is  possible  between  a  man  who  recognizes 
the  common  principles  of  morality  as  we  find  them  in  the 
overwhelming  mass  of  the  writers  of  ouj*  Church  and  one 
who,  on  learning  that  the  murder  of  a  Protestant  Sovereign 
has  been  inculcated  by  a  saint,  or  the  slaughter  of  Protestant 
subjects  approved  by  a  Pope,  sets  himself  to  find  a  new  in- 
terpretation for  the  Decaloguo.     There  is  little  to  apprehend 


REPLY   OF  LORD  ACTOiT. 


83 


from  combinations  between  men  divided  by  such  a  gulf  as 
this,  or  from  tlie  unity  of  a  body  composed  of  such  antago- 
nistic materials.  But  where  there  is  not  union  of  an  active 
or  aggressive  kind,  there  may  be  unity  in  :lefcnce  ;  and  it  is 
possible,  m  making  provision  against  the  one,  to  promote 
and  to  confirm  the  other. 

There  has  been,  and  I  believe  there  is  still,  some  exag- 
geration in  the  idea  men  form  of  the  agreement  in  thought 
and  deed  which  authority  can  accomplish.  As  far  as  decrees, 
censures,  and  persecution  could  commit  the  Court  of  Rome, 
it  was  committed  to  the  denial  of  the  Copernican  system. 
jS'evcrtheless,  the  history  of  astronomy  shows  a  whole  catena 
of  distinguished  Jesuits ;  and,  a  century  ago,  a  Spaniand  who 
thought  himself  bound  to  adopt  the  Ptolemaic  theory  was 
laughed  at-  by  the  Roman  divines.  The  submission  of 
Fenelon,  which  Protestants  and  Catholics  have  so  often 
celebrated,  is  another  instance  to  my  point.  "When  his 
book  was  condemned,  Fenelon  publicly  accepted  the  judg- 
ment as  the  voice  of  God.  He  declared  that  he  adhered  to 
the  decree  absolutely  and  without  a  shadow  of  reserve,  and 
there  were  no  bounds  to  his  submission.  In  private  he 
wrote  that  his  opinions  were  perfectly  orthodox  and  remained 
unchanged,  that  his  opponents  were  in  the  wrong,  and  that 
Rome  was  getting  religion  into  peril. 

It  is  not  the  unpropitious  times  only,  but  the  very 
nature  of  things,  that  protect  Catholicism  from  the  conse- 
quences of  some  theories  that  have  grown  up  within  it.  The 
Irish  did  not  shrink  from  resisting  the  arms  of  Henry  II.. 
though  two  Popes  had  given  him  dominion  over  them. 
They  fought  against  William  III.,  although  the  Pope  had 
given  him  efficient  support  in  his  expedition.     Even  James 


84 


REPLY  OF  LORD  ACTOX. 


:ll;;    -^ 


Ml:  . 


II.,  when  he  could  not  get  a  mitre  for  Petre,  reminded  Inno- 
cent that  people  could  be  very  good  Catholics  and  yet  do 
witliout  Rome.  Philip  II.  was  excommunicated  and  de- 
prived, but  he  despatched  his  army  against  Rome  with  the 
full  concurrence  of  the  Spanish  divines. 

That  opinions  likely  to  injure  our  position  as  loyal  sub 
jects  of  a  Protestant  sovereign,,  as  citizens  of  a  free  State, 
as  memberb  of  a  community  divided  in  religion,  have  flour- 
ished at  various  times,  and  in  various  degrees^  that  they  can 
claim  high  sanction,  that  they  are  often  uttered  in  the  exas- 
peration of  controversy,  and  are  most  strongly  urged  at  a 
time  when  there  is  no  possibility  of  putting  them  into  prac- 
tice— this  all  men  must  concede.  But  I  affirm  that,  in  the 
fiercest  conflict  of  the  Reformation,  when  the  rulers  of  the 
Church  had  almost  lost  heart  in  the  struggle  for  existence, 
and  exhausted  every  resource  of  their  authority,  both  politi- 
cal and  spiritual,  the  bulk  of  the  English  Catholics  retained 
the  spirit  of  a  better  time.  You  do  not,  I  am  glad  to  say, 
deny  that  this  continues  to  be  true.  But  you  think  that  we 
ought  to  be  compelled  to  demonstrate  one  of  two  things — 
that  the  Pope  cannot,  by  virtue  of  powers  asserted  by  the 
late  Council,  make  a  claim  which  he  was  perfectly  able  to 
make  by  virtue  of  powers  asserted  for  him  before ;  or,  that 
he  would  be  resisted  if  he  did.  The  first  is  superfluous. 
The  second  is  not  capable  of  receiving  a  written  demonstra- 
tion. Therefore  neither  of  the  altemat'ves  you  propose  to 
the  Catholics  of  this  country  opens  to  us  a  way  of  escaping 
from  the  reproach  we  have  incurred.  Whether  there  is 
more  truth  in  your  misgivings  or  in  my  confidence  the  event 
will  show,  I  hope,  at  no  distant  time. 

I  remain  sincerely  yours,  ACTON. 


[from  the   LONDON   TIMEe.] 

ARCHBISHOP  MANNING  ON  ROMAN  CATHOLIC 

POLITICS. 


A  LARGE  meeting  of  Roman  Catholics  assembled  at  Arcli- 
bisliop  Manning's  house  at  AVestminster  on  Thursday  night 
to  hear  his  inaugural  address  to  the  Roman  Catholic  Aca- 
demia  in  reference  to  the  future  policy  of  the  Catholic 
world.  In  the  course  of  his  observations  he  said  they  were 
all  aware  that  the  Catholic  Academia  was  formed  at  the 
close  of  the  last  century  to  unite  Catholics  throughout  the 
world  in  opposing  the  Atheistical  teaching  of  the  so-called 
Free-thinkers  of  Franco  and  Germany,  whoHo  thoughts  were 
disseminated  by  the  free  Pres?  of  England.  Thirteen  years 
ago  it  was  found  necessary  to  extend  the  wo'lc  of  tho  A?iio- 
ciation  to  England,  and  he  was  glad  to  say,  though  ht  did 
not  like  to  use  exulting  words,  that  they  had  done  much 
to  correct  and  t*<Iiicate  ti»e  Press  of  this  countiy.  In  the 
present  crisifs,  and  loosing  to  the  coming  great  future 
struggle,  they  had  a  vase  work  before  th»m.  Looking  at 
the  hostility  manifested  on  the  Continent  to  the  Sovereign 
Pontiff,  he  invited  their  special  attention  to  the  best  means 
of  asserting  his  infallibility  and  his  right  to  spiritual  and 
temporal  power.  One  thing  he  would  call  their  ittention  to 
— Bameiy,  thai  since  his  temporal  power  on  the  Continent 
had  been  denied  him,  his  spiritun'  power  and  influence  over 


86 


ARCHBISHOP  MANNING 


i1- 


if 


^<\ 


111 


Ill's  subjects  liad  greatly  increased.  In  the  conflict  of  nations 
which  they  had  seen  around  them  since  tlieir  departure  from 
tlieir  allegiance  to  the  temporal  power  of  the  Holy  Father, 
a  vast  amount  of  blood  had  been  shed,  and  nations  in  their 
perplexity  had  lately  been  seeking  some  means  to  avert  the 
terrible  calamities  of  war. 

At  the  International  Arbitration  Conference  recently 
held  at  Geneva,  one  of  the  influential  speakers  had  proposed 
that  cases  of  national  dispute  should  be  submitted  to  arbi- 
trators appointed  from  the  principal  nations  of  the  w^orld, 
and  their  decision  the  conflicting  nations  should  be  called 
upon  to  obey.  If,  however,  the  nations  in  question  refused 
to  submit,  then  the  whole  of  the  other  nations  were  to  be 
called  upon  to  join  in  a  war  against  the  contending  party. 
Instead  of  this  proposed  system  putting  an  end  to  war,  could 
they,  he  would  ask,  imagine  any  thing  more  likely  to  pro- 
long European  wars  than  such  a  plan  ?  There  could  be  but 
one  authorized  arbitrator  between  the  nations  of  the  earth, 
and  thut  one,  he  need  scarcely  tell  them,  was  the  one  who 
was  not  interested  in  the  temporal  afi^airs  of  one  nation  more 
than  another,  but  was  impartial  to  all,  and  that  one  was  the 
Sovereign  Pontiff'  himself.  Then  there  was  another  meet- 
ing to  which  he  would  call  their  attention,  and  that  was 
one  which  had  been  held  at  Bonn  for  the  purpose  of  en- 
deavoring to  unite  persons  of  various  religious  beliefs  upon 
spiritual  matters,  according  to  the  teachings  of  what  they 
called  the  Old  Catholics,  to  be  settled  by  the  history  of  the 
Catholic  Church.  AVell,  the  question  which  would  natu- 
rally arise  in  the  mind  of  a  true  Catholic  would  be  as  to 
who  would  have  to  select  the  historians  to  be  appealed  to. 
The  answer  of  the  Catholic  Church  would  be  that  just  as  a 
man  only  knows  his  own  spirit  and  his  own  history,  so  it  is 
with  the  Church.  The  Catholic  Church  knows  her  own 
hii^tory,  and  none  other  knows  it  so  well.  To  her  historians 
n^wl  to  hoT  teachings  alone,  then,  such  parties  must  retuin. 

The  next  question,  then,  to  which  he  would  invite  theii 


ox  IIOMAX  CATHOLIC  POLITICS. 


87 


attention,  was  tlie  modern  scepticism,  free  thouglit,  ami  so- 
called  scientific  teachings  of  the  day  in  relation  to  Catholic 
teaching,  and  for  an  illustration  of  the  style  of  thought  he 
would  refer  them  to  Professor  Tyndall's  address  the  other 
day  at  the  Belfast  meeting  of  the  British  Association.  Upon 
this  subject  they  would  do  well  to  read  a  very  excellent 
article  in  The  Times  of  Saturday  last.  Whoever  wrote  that 
article,  he  Avas  a  good  man,  and  knew  what  he  was  writing 
about.  It  was  the  old  story  of  Galileo,  and  they  would  do 
well  to  study  these  articles  for  the  purpose  of  answering 
them  according  to  the  teachings  of  the  Catholic  Church. 
Other  subjects  to  which  he  would  like  them  to  give  their  at- 
tention were  the  various  phases  of  thought  in  the  Protestant 
Church,  and  especially  those  among  the  Dissenters.  The 
other  questions  which  he  invited  their  most  serious  consid- 
eration to  were  the  infallibility  of  the  Holy  Father,  his  right 
to  temporal  as  well  as  spiritual  authority,  and,  amid  all  the 
coniiicting  opinions  of  the  world,  the  ultimate  necessity  of 
acknowledging  civil  allegiance  to  him  as  their  onl}''  safety. 
Within  the  last  twenty-four  hours  it  had  been  intimated  to 
him  that  the  Catholic  world  was  threatened  with  a  contro- 
versy on  the  whole  of  the  decrees  of  the  Yatican  Council. 
From  this  and  other  matters  which  had  come  to  his  knowl- 
edge he  could  see  that  they  were  on  the  very  eve  of  one  of 
the  mightiest  controversies  the  religious  world  had  ever 
seen.  Certainly  nothing  like  the  controversy  on  which  they 
were  about  to  enter  had  occurred  during  the  last  three  hun- 
dred years,  and  they  must  be  prepared.  If  they  would  only 
prepare  themselves,  he  did  not  fear  for  the  decrees  of  the 
Yatican  Council,  or  for  the  Yatican  itself.  But  they  must 
have  no  half-hearted  measures.  They  must  have  no  half- 
fearful,  half-hearted  assertions  of  the  Sovereign  Pontill's 
claim  ;  they  must  not  fear  to  declare  to  England,  and  to  the 
world  through  the  free  Press  of  England,  the  Sovereign  Pon- 
tiff's claim  to  infallibility,  his  right  to  temporal  power,  and 
the  duty  of  the  nations  of  the  earth  to  return  to  their  allcgi- 


88 


IXFALLIIJILITY   OF  TilE  TOPE. 


s- 


1 1 


I 


"r: 


'  i'    IT 


ance  to  him.  It'thej  did  this — it' they  proclaimed  this  with 
no  uncertain  sound,  Protestants  of  England  and  Protestants 
throughout  the  world  would  hear  them  and  bo  convinced. 
If  they  did  this,  the  Protestant  world  would  give  them 
credit  for  their  courage,  and  believe  in  them  for  their  own 
honesty's  sake.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  they  minced  matters 
and  spoke  in  half-fearful  measures,  Protestants  would  only 
turn  a  way  from  themi  for  their  want  of  honesty.  Protes- 
tants knew  well  what  they  meant,  and  what  the  claims  of 
the  Catholic  Church  are,  and  therefore  it  would  be  best  for 
the  Church  now  to  speak  out,  and  he  had  no  fear  for  the 
result. 


[from  the  londox  weekly  register.] 
INFALLIBILITY    OF    THE    POPE 

BY   THE  EIGHT  EEV.   MONSIGNOK  CAPEL,  D.D. 

TnouGU  a  blow  is  dealt  us  through  the  Kitualists,  and  a 
severe  judgment  passed  on  tlie  converts  in  Mr.  Gladstone's 
pamphlet,  yet  the  real  stumbling-block  of  offence  on  our  part 
is  that,  according  to  him,  ever  since  1870  we  have  accepted 
the  infallibility  of  the  Pope.  This  wonderful  "  change  in  the 
constitution  of  the  Latin  Church"  sorely  dislrccses  the  au- 
thor, and  leads  him  to  sav  that  Rome  "  has  substituted  for  the 
proud  boast  of  semper  eadem,  a  policy  of  violence  and  change 
in  laith."  Yet,  as  though  forgetful  of  so  writing,  he  proceeds 
to  the  contradictory  assertion  that  the  Church  "  has  refur- 
bished and  paraded  anew  every  rusty  tool  which  she  was  fond- 
ly thought  to  have  disused."  With  this  definite  accusation 
we  wish,  therefore,  to  deal. 

AVe  have  to  remember  that  previous  to  1870  every  Catho- 
lic was  bound  to  believe : — 

1.  That  the  gift  of  infallibility  was  given  to  the  Church 


f  >  I 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  TOPE. 


89 


of  God ;  tliat  Clmrcli  being  none  other  than  the  communion 
under  the  authority  of  the  Sec  of  Rome. 

2.  That  this  gift  of  infallibility  was  exercised  both  by  the 
teaching  body  of  the  Church  united  to  its  head,  whether  that 
Church  was  dispersed  throughout  the  world,  or  assembled  in 
General  Council. 

By  this  no  Catholic  meant  to  imply  that  infallibility  was 
identical  with  inspiration,  much  less  that  the  Church  was 
spotless,  either  in  its  individual  pastors  or  in  its  head,  but 
only  that  the  Spirit  of  God  so  overruled  her  utterances  that 
she  could  not  teach  the  faithful  any  thing  at  variance  with 
the  truth.  As  to  the  object  or  sphere  of  this  infallibility, 
every  Catholic  was  further  bound  to  believe  that  it  extended 
to  all  truths  bearing  upon  faith  and  the  eternal  welfare  of 
mankind,  or,  in  other  words,  to  the  whole  of  faith  and  mor- 
als. Every  instructed  Catholic  further  knew  and  held  that 
the  belief  ex  animo  in  these  discussions  of  the  Church  was 
the  primary  and  necessary  condition  for  his  communion  with 
her.  He  believed,  however,  that  until  she  spoke  he  had  a 
perfect  right  to  discuss  undecided  questions,  but  always  sub- 
ject to  the  suppressed  premise  in  his  mind  that  he  would 
obey  whatever  she  w  ould  declare. 

!Now,  we  ask  what  change  after  the  decision  by  the  Yati- 
can  Council  was  eftected  in  the  creed  of  a  Catholic  ?  ^None 
as  to  the  gift  of  infallibility ;  none  as  to  the  object  of  infalli- 
bility; none  as  to  the  double  exercise  of  the  infallibility 
mentioned ;  but  only  that  the  ex  cathedra^  or  official  utter- 
ances of  the  Head  of  the  Church,  were  so  directed  by  the 
Holy  Gliost  that  they  could  not  be  at  variance  with  the 
truth.  In  fact,  the  Yatican  Council  declares  that  the  Head 
of  the  Church  when  teaching  ex  cathedra  is  as  unerring  as 
she  herself  is  in  General  Council,  or  when  dispersed  through- 
out the  world.  By  this,  what  had  been  the  unvarying  prac- 
tice of  the  Popes  for  so  many  centuries  was  declared  to  be 
an  infallible  rule  of  action  for  the  Church. 

How,  then,  Mr.  Gladstone  can  assert  that  an  essential 


IS 


90 


INFALLIBILITY   OF  THE  POPE. 


X^:. 


f  i 


il 

f*' 

il 

|ji 

|!f| 

fi] 

1 

p 

'^ti 

J 

f.\ 

1 

11.'.- ; 

^'i'.;F 

i 

<■'• 

1.  ■ 

*.: 

1'  ^ 

11 

1 

change  in  lier  constitution  has  tal<en  place  passes  our  com- 
prehension, lie  must  he  fully  aware  that  throughout  the 
long  history  of  the  Church  of  God  the  popes  have  not  waited 
to  have  their  infallibility  declared,  hut  have  acted  as  possess- 
ors of  it,  condemning  unsound  doctrines  whenever  they 
made  their  appearance,  or  proclaming  truths  anew  when 
they  were  in  danger  of  becoming  obscured  or  perverted. 
Those  who  obstinately  refused  submission  to  any  dogmatic 
decree  of  tlie  Sovereign  Pontiff  were  ever  considered  guilty 
of  grave  sin.  It  was  not  until  the  fifteenth  century  that 
any  attempt  was  ever  made  to  assert  that  an  appeal  might 
be  made  Jigainst  the  Pope's  judgment  to  a  future  QLcumeni- 
cal  Council.  The  promptitude  with  which  the  faithful  as. 
sented  to  Pope  Martin  Y.'s  condemnation  of  this  proposition 
in  1418  bears  witness  to  the  sense  of  the  Church  on  this 
question.     But  we  may  pass  from  theory  to  facts. 

Kot  to  go  earlier  back  than  the  year  510,  every  Eastern 
Pishop,  witliout  exception,  whom  Mr.  Gladstone  would,  in 
common  with  IJigh  Churchmen,  hold  to  have  been  Catholic, 
individually  asserted  his  belief  that,  by  Christ's  promise,  the 
Apostolic  See  could -not  fail  in  faith,  and  that  communion 
with  the  Catholic  Church  could  be  defined  by  saying  that  a 
person  was  in  harmony  {^U'onseniiois")  with  that  See  :  and 
that,  in  so  doing,  he  was  following  in  all  things  the  constitu- 
tions of  the  Fathers.  Tlie  following  is  the  notable  "  Eegula 
Fidei"  of  Pope  Ilormisdas,  which  was  signed  by  all  the 
Eastern  Bishops  who  had  joined  the  Acacian  schism,  and  by 
the  Emperor  Justinian,  and  by  the  Patriarchs  of  Constan- 
tinople— Epiphanius,  John,  and  Mennas.  At  the  Sth  Gen- 
eral Council  (and  this  has  the  same  authority  as  the  first  four) 
no  Bishop  took  his  seat  without  signing  it — mutatis  mutmi' 
dis — the  grounds  of  his  faith  being  identical,  viz.,  the  infalli- 
bility, or,  in  the  language  of  the  day,  the  Immaculateness, 
by  Christ's  promise,  of  the  Faith  of  the  See  of  Peter: — 

"  The  first  condition  of  salvation  is  to  hold  firm  the  Rule 
of  the  true  Faith,  and  in  no  way  to  deviate  from  the  consti- 


INFALLIIJILITY   OF  THE  POPE. 


01 


^ 
i 


tiitions  of  the  Fatlier.-f.  And  becauso  the  Ptatoinciit  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  when  lie  said, 'Thou  art  Peter, and  upon 
this  rock  I  will  build  my  church,'  etc.,  cannot  be  set  aside ; 
tliis,  whicli  is  said,  is  proved  by  results,  because  in  the  Apos- 
tolic See  religion  has  always  been  preserved  undefiled.  De- 
sirous, therefore,  by  no  means  to  be  separated  from  this  hope 
and  faith,  and  following  in  ah  matters  the  constitutions  of 
i;he  Fathers,  we  anathematize  all  heretics,  especially.  .  .  ." 
Then  follow  certain  heretics  by  name  (others  of  the  time  be- 
ing substituted  for  them  at  the  8th  General  Council),  and, 


among 


them, 


li 


.  Acacius,  who  persisted  in  their  com- 
munion and  fellowship;  because  he  has  deserved  a  sentence 
like  that  of  those  whose  communion  he  attached  himself  to. 
.  .  .  Wherefore  wo  receive  and  approve  of  all  the  General 
Epistles  {Eplstolas  Universas)  of  Pope  Leo,  wherein  he  wrote 
concerning  the  true  religion.  Hence,  as  we  have  said,  fol- 
lowing in  all  respects  the  Apostolic  See,  and  publishing  all 
its  constitutions,  I  hope  that  I  may  deserve  to  be  in  the  one 
communion  with  you,  which  the  Apostolic  See  proclaimii, 
wherein  the  Christian  religion  is  effectually  and  truly  consoli- 
dated {hi  (jucl  est  integraet  verax  Cht'lstiancereligmnssolidi- 
tas) :  promising,  also,  that  the  names  '  those  who  are  cut 
oif  (.sequesfi'atos)  from  the  communion  ('f  the  Catholic  Church, 
that  is,  not  consentient  with  the  Apostolic  See,  shall  not  be 
recited  during  the  sacred  mysteries.  This,  my  profession,  I 
have  subscribed  \vitli  my  own  hand,  and  delivered  to  you, 
Ilormisdas,  the  holy  and  venerable  Pope  of  the  City  of 
Rome."  {Li  Ifansii.  Collect,  concil.,  T.  viii.,  pp.  407,  408.) 
At  this  period  the  rights  of  the  primacy  were  recognized 
by  imperial  constitutions,  as  in  the  instances  of  Yalentinian 
and  Justinian.  "According  to  ancient  custom,"  says  the 
law  of  Valentinian,  "  neither  tlie  Bishops  of  Gaul  nor  those 
of  any  other  provinces,  may  undertake  anything  (that  is,  of 
importance  causa  ivnjor)  without  the  authority  of  the  vener- 
able Pope  of  the  Eternal  City.  Whatever,  therefore,  has 
been  or  may  be  approved  by  the  authority  of  the  Apostol'O 


^, 


.^^ 


^    \'^     ^ 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-S) 


1.0 


I.! 


11.25 


IM  11.6 


Photographic 

Sciences 

Corporation 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  14SM 

(716)  S73-4S03 


«.> 


if 


i£3 


1 

«■ 


f 


.  s 


?'■ 


^1! 
W 

m 


m 


Pi 

m 


m 


l! 


;)■•» 


I' 


1    ; 


^U; 


02 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  POPE. 


See,  let  it  be  a,  law  for  all.  "  The  Emperor  Justinian  calls 
the  Bishops  of  Kome  caput  omnium  Dei  sacerdotum,  omnium 
ecdesiarum  ;  and  the  Church  of  K^me  Apex  Pontijicatus^ 
by  whose  judgment  heretics  were  at  all  times  overthrown 
(Cod.  Justin,  de  summa  Trinib.,  T.  i.,  Ex.  7  and  8,  novel  9, 
at  the  beginning).  When  King  Theodoric  summoned  a 
Synod  "  to  meet  at  Eome,  a.  d.  503,  for  the  purpose  of  pass- 
ing judgment  upon  Pope  Symmachus,  who  had  been  accused 
of  various  misdemeanors,  the  assembled  Bishops  cried  out 
that  the  idea  of  '  suhjecting  the  Head  of  the  Church  to  the 
judgment  of  his  inferiors  was  entirely  unheard  of.''  The 
reply  of  the  Eastern  Bishops  was  of  a  similar  character." 
(Cf.  Socrat  h.  e.  ii.  8,  cited  by  Alzog,  p.  673.) 

"Peter  has  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  Leo,"  said  the 
Fathers  at  Chalcedon  in  451,  when  the  letter  of  S.  Leo  was 
read  to  them.  Fourteen  centuries  later  the  assembled  Bish- 
ops at  Eomc  on  S.  Peter's  Day  cried,  "  Peter  has  spoken  ty 
the  mouth  of  Pius." 

In  the  Council  assembled  at  Florence  in  1439,  a  decree 
condemning  the  opinions  professed  at  Constance  to  the  det- 
riment of  the  Papal  supremacy  ran  thus:  "Moreover,  we 
find  that  the  Holy  Apostolic  See  and  the  Roman  Pontiff 
possess  the  primacy  over  the  whole  world,  and  the  Roman 
Pontiff  himself  is  the  successor  of  S.  Peter,  Prince  of  the 
Apostles,  and  that  he  is  the  true  Yicar  of  Christ,  and  Head 
of  the  whole  Church,  and  the  Father  and  Teacher  of  all 
Christians ;  and  that  to  him,  S.  Peter,  was  delivered  by  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord  the  full  power  of  feeding,  ruling,  and  gov- 
erning the  Universal  Church:  as  also  is  con  ained  in  the 
acts  of  (Ecumenical  Councils  and  in  the  Sacred  Canons." 
Need  Mr.  Gladstone  be  reminded  that  it  was  Innocent  the 
Tenth,  in  1653,  that  condemned  the  propositions  of  Jan- 
senius;  that  it  was  Innocent  the  Eleventh  who,  in  1682, 
raised  his  voice  in  condemnation  of  the  GalHcan  opinions, 
which  were  published  for  the  first  time  since  the  Councils 
of  Constance  and  Basle.    Space  would  fad  us  to  note  the 


I 


^ 


w 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE   POPE 


93 


unceasing  exercise  of  supremacy  by  the  Apostolic  See  in 
matters  of  doctrine,  of  morals,  and  of  discipline.  The  previ- 
ous cases  are  sufficient  for  our  purpose,  and  we  v.'ould  refer 
our  readers  for  further  instances  to  "  Kenrick  on  the  Pri- 
macy of  the  See  of  S.  Peter,"  or  to  the  invaluable  little 
work  of  Father  Knox,  of  the  Oratory,  entitled  "  When  does 
the  Church  Speak  Infallibly  ? "  from  whose  pages  we  have 
freely  citeJ.  We  think  that  our  readers  will  candidly  avow 
that,  notwithstanding  the  assertions  of  Mr.  Gladstone,  the 
power  and  pretensions  of  the  Papacy  have  been  always  the 
same. 

But  the  right  honorable  gentleman  feels  much  concern 
lest  this  power  of  the  Pope  should  trespass  on  the  civil 
domain.  We  need  only  remind  him  that  after  the  decision 
of  1870  the  field  over  which  Infallibility  extends  was  neither 
increased  nor  diminished ;  since,  as  before,  the  Church  has 
held  that  "  politics,  or  the  science  which  treats  of  the  State, 
most  necessarily  from  its  ethical  character  present  many 
points  of  contact  with  revealed  truth.  The  principles  on 
M'hich  it  is  based  flow  from  the  natural  law.  They  can  never, 
therefore,  be  in  real  contradiction  with  the  precepts  of  the 
Divine  and  positive  law.  Hence  the  State,  if  it  only  remain 
true  to  its  fundamental  principles,  must  ever  be  in  the  com- 
plctest  harmony  with  the  Church  and  Revelation. 

Now,  so  long  as  this  harmony  continues,  the  Church  has 
neither  call  nor  right  to  interfere  with  the  State,  for  earthly 
politics  do  not  fall  within  her  direct  jurisdiction.  The  mo- 
ment, however,  the  State  becomes  unfaithful  to  its  prin- 
ciples, and  contravenes  the  Divine  and  positive  law,  that 
moment  it  is  the  Church's  right  and  duty,  as  guardian  of 
revealed  truth,  to  interfere,  and  to  proclaim  to  the  State  the 
truths  which  it  has  ignored,  and  to  condemn  the  erroneous 
maxims  which  it  has  adopted.  Unhappily  the  State  has  too 
often  given  the  Church  occasion  for  interference,  and  false 
doctrines  in  politics  have  always  found  adherents,  because 
they  pandered  to  the  greed  of  power  and  money,  as  well  as 


94 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  POPE, 


?!t"; 


i:   ■ 


B'''.* . 


il. 


k ' 


!!■ 


U 


^ 


Ih 


to  tlie  abhorrence  of  control,  wliich  are  so  deeply  rooted  in 
our  tallen  nature.  In  former  days,  when  civil  society  was 
leavened  with  the  principles  of  the  Faith,  the  Church,  by 
entering  into  direct  communication  with  the  rulers  of  differ- 
ent States,  could  often  quietly  impede  the  spread  of  error, 
and  allay,  by  personal  influence,  the  evil  consequences  aris- 
ing from  false  principles  of  government.  But  what  was 
possible  then  is  not  possible  now,  when  society  is  unchris- 
tianizing  itself  more  and  more  every  day,  and  kings  and 
statesmen  habitually  assume  a  position  of  open  hostility  or 
haughty  distrust  toward  the  Church.  Therefore  of  late 
years  she  has  been  forced  to  lift  up  her  voice,  and  from  the 
Chair  of  Peter  to  cry  aloud  to  the  faithful  throughout  the 
world,  in  accents  of  solemn  warning,  against  the  pernicious 
errors  with  which  the  political  atmosphere  is  everywhere 
loaded."— Knox  on  "  The  Infallibility,"  p.  70.  His  mind 
may  bo  quieted  by  reading  the  following  letter,  addressed 
by  Pope  Gelasius,  at  the  close  of  the  fifth  century,  to  the 
Emperor  Anastasius : — 

"  God  forbid  that  a  Roman  Prince  should  feel  offended 
at  the  declaration  of  the  t;ruth !  There  are  two  things,  au- 
gust emperor,  whereby  this  world  is  governed,  namely,  the 
sacred  authority  of  Pontiffs  and  the  royal  power,  wherein 
the  weight  of  priestly  authority  is  so  much  the  greater,  as  in 
the  Divine  judgment  Priests  must  render  to  the  Lord  an  ac- 
count of  themselves.  For  you  know,  most  clement  son,  that 
although  you  preside  over  men,  you  devoutly  bend  the  neck 
to  the  dispensers  of  the  Divine  Mysteries,  and  ask  from 
them  the' means  of  salvation:  and  in  the  reception  and 
proper  administration  of  the  heavenlv  Sacraments,  you 
know  that  you  should  be  subject  to  them  according  to  the 
religious  rule,  rather  than  preside  over  them.  You  are 
aware,  then,  that  as  to  these  things  you  depend  on  their 
judgment,  and  that  they  are  not  to  be  forced  to  compliance 
with  your  will.  For  if,  as  regards  public  order,  the  prelates 
of  the  Church,  knowing  that  the  empire  has  been  confided  to 


l.i    ! 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  POPE. 


96 


.1 


you  l)y  Divine  Providence,  obey  your  laws,  lest  tliey  slioiild 
appear  to  oppose  your  will  in  things  of  this  world,  with  what 
affection  should  you  obey  them  who  arc  appointed  to  dis- 
pense the  awful  mysteries  I  AYherefore,  as  the  Pontiffs  in- 
cur a  serious  responsibility  if  they  suppress  what  they  should 
declare  for  the  honor  of  the  Deity,  so  the  danger  is  great  of 
others  who  insolently  refuse  obedience.  And  if  the  hearts 
of  the  faithful  should  be  su?  missive  to  all  priests  in  general 
who  treat  Divine  things  properly,  how  much  more  should 
assent  be  yielded  to  the  Prelate  of  this  See,  M'hom  the 
Supreme  Lord  ordained  to  preside  over  all  priests,  and  whom 
the  piety  of  the  universal  Church  has  always  honored  I  You 
clearly  understand  that  no  one  can,  by  any  human  device,  op- 
pose the  prerogative  of  confcssi9n  of  him  whom  the  voice  of 
Christ  preferred  to  all  others,  whom  the  Holy  Church  Las 
always  acknowledged,  and  whom  she  now  devoutly  regards 
as  her  Primate." 

"  This,"  says  Dr.  Kenrick,  from  whom  we  cite,  "  has  been 
deservedly  regarded  as  an  admirable  exposition  of  the  rela- 
tion of  Catholic  princes  to  the  prelacy.  The  power  of  the 
prince  is  supreme  in  the  civil  order ;  the  power  of  the  Pon- 
tiff is  ."supreme  in  things  spiritual.  The  civil  and  the  ecclesias- 
tical powers  are  from  God  ;  the  former  by  his  implied  sanc- 
tion of  the  means  of  maintaining  social  order ;  the  latter  by 
the  direct  institution  of  Christ.  In  both  the  sovereignty  of 
God  must  be  honored.  Tne  civil  power  extends  to  all  things 
necessary  for  the  maintenance  and  welfare  of  society,  but  it 
cannot  command  anything  opposed  to  the  Divine  law.  The 
ecclesiastical  authority  is  engaged  in  the  promulgation  of 
truth  and  the  maintenance  of  discipline,  with  a  due  respect 
for  public  order  as  regulated  by  the  civil  power."  .  .  . 

"  The  Pope,  as  head  on  earth  of  the  Church,  exercises, 
by  Divine  right,  authority  over  Catholic  princes  in  the 
things  that  arc  of  salvation.  "When  by  flagrant  crimes  they 
cause  the  name  of  God  to  be  blasphemed,  he  may  admonish 
and  reprove  them,  as  l^athan  reproved  David  by  the  Divine 


96 


INFALLIBILITY  OF  THE  POPE. 


i: 


W"     '  ! 


..Vl; 


||- 


m 

■I: 


f 


command ;  and,  in  case  of  contumacy,  he  may  inflict  on 
them  ecclesiastical  censures.  The  exercise  of  this  power 
peculiarly  suits  the  Chief  Bishop,  since  local  prelates  could 
scarcely  venture  to  say  to  their  prince — '  Thou  art  the  man.' 
The  majesty  of  the  Sovereign  is  guarded  by  reserving  cases 
in  which  he  is  concerned  to  the  mature  and  unbiassed  judg- 
ment of  the  Pontiff."  —  (Primacy  of  the  Apostolic  See, 
p.  326.) 

These  extracts,  so  clearly  stating  the  relations  of  the 
primacy  to  the  civil  power,  will  doubtless  establish,  to  the 
satisfaction  of  many,  that,  instead  of  seeking  the  destruction 
of  the  State,  the  Church  has  always  been  her  cooperator, 
and  that  in  condemning,  as  she  has  in  her  Syllabus,  a  liher- 
tas  which  is  synonymous  with  licence,  and  in  maintaining 
the  supremacy  of  Divine  authority  in  declaring  the  sacred- 
ness  of  marriage,  and  asserting  the  necessity  of  religion  in 
the  instruction  of  youth  (see  the  IStli  proposition,  cited  on 
page  16  of  the  pamphlcl;)^  she  is  but  throwing  a  safeguard 
around  society,  and  upholding  the  absolute  sovereignty  of 
God  over  man. 

"We  should  have  expecfted  that  a  High  Churchman  like 
Mr.  Gladstone,  and  a  statesman  of  such  great  experience, 
who,  doubtless,  recognises  the  necessity  for  enactments  such 
as  Lord  Campbell's  Act,  would,  instead  of  questioning  these 
truths,  be  the  first  to  give  them  his  cordial  asrient.  He  must 
not  blame  us  if,  instead  of  accepting  his  views  on  these 
points,  we  prefer  to  be  guided  by  the  unerring  instinct  of 
the  Church  of  God. 


THE    END. 


m. 


iTanB'iitt"iTr- 


I 


: 


9         n 


